New GHOSTBUSTERS film confirmed with all-female cast

hasn't even widely dropped yet.. expect that to go waaaay down as da week goes by.
Click to expand...
thats true, but some of those early critics are the harshest.

then i again i think nostalgic ghostbusters fans are gonna go in


i think its going to be better than i thought

i read a leaked script online and it sounded ****** HORRIBLE but idk, i meal paul fieg is aite.


http://uproxx.com/movies/ghostbusters-review/
 
Last edited:
I think it'll do ok money wise.

I don't even consider this a ghostbusters movie. It's fieg's own bizarro version of random females fighting neon colored ghosts.
 
Sorry guys, but I want this to bomb.

Also keep in mind,I wouldn't be surprised if some critics go easy on this so that they aren't accused of being misogynists.

For example, the IGN review....just from reading the words they used , it sounded they wanted to say the movie was horrible but they were generous with the rating.
 
Last edited:
My main gripe is how they went about with this movie. Obviously there's an agenda and what bothered me is the fact they had to sue Bill Murray to appear in the movie. The first trailer was very misleading when they made a reference to the original. People were confused whether this was a reboot or a continuation. Also, they knew they had to promote this movie heavy ...so they did it during the NBA finals but using none of the female actors....just use Kobe and the Knicks lol...yes...try to win back the male audience by not airing the actual trailers but use NBA players. Sony deleting critical comments on YouTube and leaving the misogynist comments also bothered me. They clearly want to make it seem the criticism is all sexist. :smh:

And for the record, I would've been more opened to this movie if it was either a continuation or if they had to reboot it, at least use a better cast and story....instead of this reboot with these scooby doo effects.


I can't support it because I don't want Hollywood to think doing these type of reboots are ok.Ive already made up my mind.
 
Last edited:
sckid20 said:
so people are saying this isn't that bad.
Click to expand...
But how though
sick.gif
 
Fantastic 4 and Batman v Superman showed me to be very skeptical of early reviews. I expect this movie will be trash.
 
pr0phecy718 said:
Also, they knew they had to promote this movie heavy ...so they did it during the NBA finals but using none of the female actors....just use Kobe and the Knicks lol...yes...try to win back the male audience by not airing the actual trailers but use NBA players. Sony deleting critical comments on YouTube and leaving the misogynist comments also bothered me. They clearly want to make it seem the criticism is all sexist. :smh:
Click to expand...


All of this
 
SONY's handling of this entire thing could've gone a lot better:

1.) Put out a strong first trailer. I think people generally liked the cast when they were announced, but that first trailer was terrible. SONY knew exactly what the sentiment would be if the trailer flopped and they still allowed it to be released.

2.) Be careful with management's choice of words. The fact that Feig started attacking fans shows immaturity. When you react emotionally to internet folks, you lose traction, especially when your outbursts sound like straight butthurted-ness. Feig should've assured the fans that he'd be working hard to make it a good film. How difficult is that to say via a Twitter post?

3.) The SONY leaks shouldn't have happened. The world found out that the studio execs act like moronic kids and have an agenda to push (and not an actually good film, first and foremost). They literally forced the former cast to be a part of this film, accused anyone who said anything bad about the film as being sexists/misogynists, and removed any negative comments. Does that sound very accepting and welcoming of different opinions?

The only support I gave this film was copping some Hi-C Ecto-cooler, which was great.
 
Last edited:
It's a reboot, not a remake, and its four new leads are fantastic.
Only idiots pre-judge films. Trailers are increasingly so misleading that the only true test of a movie is when the lights dim and the titles roll.

And yes, idiots pre-judged this film.

From the moment it was announced, so-called fanboys declared the female-led Ghostbusters a piece of feminist propaganda – helpfully allowing us to identify precisely who to unfollow on social media.

The next level of premature opposition came from those who watched the trailers and deduced that this was to be the unfunniest film of all time. OF. ALL. TIME.

If there was to be any merit given to the Ghostbusters pre-haters, it came in the form of the scepticism over reboots in general. The original Ghostbusters was made in 1984, yet there's little beyond the giant hair of Harold Ramis and Sigourney Weaver to make it feel dated – a factor that contributes heavily to its re-watchability. Again, though, the same could be said for Tim Burton's Batman (1989), which only sixteen years later would be spectacularly reimagined by Christopher Nolan in Batman Begins.

The key word, of course, is 'reboot', which – unlike remakes – have licence to edit the story, characters and setting of the original for a whole new audience. Paul Feig's Ghostbusters is unreservedly a reboot. Indeed, it bears so little resemblance to the first film that comparisons are, by and large, pointless. Beyond the theme song, name and general busting of ghosts, this is a new film for a new generation, led by four comedic heavyweights in their absolute prime.

Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones are a powerhouse ensemble, embodying four distinctly new and wonderfully defined characters. Wiig's uptight academic with a zero-point flirtation game bounces perfectly off McCarthy's acerbic renegade scientist, while McKinnon's genius inventor is so absurdly odd that only Jones's streetwise Patty could keep the balance in check. They're a courageous and capable collection of heroes supported by an amusing turn from Chris Hemsworth as the team's air-head secretary. The only time gender is ever even touched upon is in a nod to those internet fanboys, with Wiig reading aloud a YouTube comment that declares "ain't no ******* gonna hunt no ghosts".

To suggest that this film's shortcomings have anything to do with its leads being women is so plainly dim as to not even warrant comment. After all, let's remember that just five years ago Feig, Wiig and McCarthy delivered the funniest film of the year in Bridesmaids. No, where Ghostbusters unfortunately falls short is in its story – and it's here that comparisons to the original are unavoidable. The original Ghostbusters was a deceptively complex story masquerading as a simple one, with multiple vignettes that not just cleverly, but critically, came together at the film's climatic crisis point. EPA intervention, an overloaded containment unit, bureaucratic interference and the seemingly-irrelevant lives of several apartment dwelling strangers all suddenly merged with both the Ghostbusters' own story and the ever-growing menace from the opening scene in a spectacular (and genuinely spooky) explosion of paranormal activity.

By contrast, Feig's Ghostbusters is a disappointingly simple film striving ever so hard to seem more complex. Everything that happens on the supernatural front is the result of a single, poorly-defined human villain whose motivations for bringing about the apocalypse are nothing more than that he was bullied as a child. Compare that with Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson in the original film as they considered, with genuine trepidation, the possibility that Judgment Day was truly upon them. Their fear became ours, and that combination of bona fide supernatural horror with outstanding humour was what made it one of the most successful and enduring comedies of all time.

That's what's so noticeably absent in this reboot: the laughs aren't nearly as frequent as you'd expect, and the scary stuff simply isn't. Yes, there are some spectacularly funny moments, with Jones's debut outing as a Ghostbuster during a metal concert being the standout. Still, for a cast of this calibre, you're right to expect more. As for the ghosts, they scarcely feature until the effects-laden finale, one that's over as quickly as it begins.

All in all, this is not a film that's going to destroy your childhood like so many clairvoyant haters suggested. Sadly, it's not quite a home-run either. The film's greatest strength, by far, is its cast. The four leads compliment each other magnificently and there's no scene-stealing; each has her moment in the spotlight, yet knows when to let the others shine. The post-credits scene, too, offers a tantalising hint at what the sequel might concern itself with. Here's hoping it happens sooner rather than later. Feig's Ghostbusters is not a particularly memorable film, but it's an excellent step in the right direction and an exciting glimpse of what might come next.
Click to expand...


i mite see it in the theatre
 
Calls people who pre judges the movie idiots but then at the end of the article says the movie is not a home run and falls flat in a couple of things....alright.... :stoneface:
 
Last edited:
Oh boy
The new “Ghostbusters” aren’t going anywhere, at least according to producer Amy Pascal.

“I have waited for this moment for a year!” she told The Hollywood Reporter at the film’s world premiere in Los Angeles. “It’s going to be endless. People are going to love this movie so much that’s they’re going to demand more and more.”
Click to expand...
 
Reviews are coming in, average assessment is that it's better than ghostbusters 2 but rather ti be view when it hits cable
 
Brondiesel said:
Oh boy
The new “Ghostbusters” aren’t going anywhere, at least according to producer Amy Pascal.

“I have waited for this moment for a year!” she told The Hollywood Reporter at the film’s world premiere in Los Angeles. “It’s going to be endless. People are going to love this movie so much that’s they’re going to demand more and more.”
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I really don't like her lol...especially after reading her leaked emails
 
Last edited:
I've had enough of these "reviews" calling men idiots or man babies while at the same time making it only a sex thing :stoneface:
 
Last edited:
Law3001 said:
Reviews are coming in, average assessment is that it's better than ghostbusters 2 but rather ti be view when it hits cable
Click to expand...
Was Ghostbusters 2 that bad? I thought the movie was pretty good lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom