Ghostbusters (2016)

earthfell

Golden Knight of the Realm
730
145
'Ghostbusters' reboot a horrifying mess | Chicago Sun-Times

I like Roeper as a reviewer so I place some faith in his reviews. I wasn't going to see this movie anyways so it doesn't really matter to me.
You need to check your privilege and head to the New York Times:Our 'Ghostbusters' Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.

Sliding into theaters on a river of slime and an endless supply of good vibes, the new, cheerfully silly "Ghostbusters" is that rarest of big-studio offerings - a movie that is a lot of enjoyable, disposable fun. And enjoy it while you can because this doesn't happen often, even in summer, which is supposed to be our season of collective moviegoing happiness. The season when everyone jumps onboard (whee!) and agrees that, yes, this great goof is exactly what you were thinking when you wondered why they didn't make summer movies like they used to.
It's at once satisfyingly familiar and satisfyingly different, kind of like a new production of "Macbeth" or a Christopher Nolan rethink of Batman.
Part of what makes "Ghostbusters" enjoyable is that it allows women to be as simply and uncomplicatedly funny as men, though it would have been nice if Ms. Jones had been given more to do. (If this were a radical reboot, she would have played a scientist.) In the end, these are Ghostbusters, not Ghostbusting suffragists, even if there's plenty of feminism onscreen and off. It's hard to know if the movie started off being as meta as it now plays, but when these Ghostbusters are labeled frauds - or crack jokes about ugly online comments or take on a fan boy from hell - it sure feels as if Mr. Feig and his team are blowing gleeful raspberries at the project's early sexist attackers.
beoO8Tq.gif
 

Ridas

Pay to play forum
2,868
4,111
"Part of what makes ?Ghostbusters? enjoyable is that it allows women to be as simply and uncomplicatedly funny as men, (...)" New York Times

Good job being as funny as Adam Sandler (Pixels) and Kevin James (Mall Cop). Those were the two first movies coming to mind, when I saw the trailer. Looking forward to the RedLetterMedia review.
 

khalid

Unelected Mod
14,071
6,775
Ghostbusters - Movie Review - YouTube

Stuckmann review. It's so fucking sad that he has to spend the first half of the video trying preface he's not sexist/racist/mysoginistic/etc.
So his review mentions the same thing the guy in the car review had, that "every male in this movie is either an idiot, a coward or an asshole and its pretty unprecedented". Also, the final scene of the movie has "another hit at men".

Thanks Paul Feig for pushing your stupid agenda at the cost of a classic.
 

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,688
212,905
That ny times article is probably funnier than the movie. "This movie is funny, so take that you fucking asshole men with your shitlord privelages.". Im not sure thats supposed to be a positive review, if its as funny as you claimed, then why do you sound so fucking defensive?
 

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
27,121
71,820
That ny times article is probably funnier than the movie. "This movie is funny, so take that you fucking asshole men with your shitlord privelages.". I'm not sure that's supposed to be a positive review, if its as funny as you claimed, then why do you sound so fucking defensive?
That was what I thought as well. Is this really supposed to be a positive review? It doesn't read like a positive review at all.
 

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
The biggest problem with that "Men aren't funny" article is that, by all appearances, his Ghostbusters movie seems to indulge (if not rely on) exactly the type of low-brow humor he's lambasting.
 

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,688
212,905
The biggest problem with that "Men aren't funny" article is that, by all appearances, his Ghostbusters movie seems to indulge (if not rely on) exactly the type of low-brow humor he's lambasting.
its literal slapstick humor. im pretty sure women didnt invent that, euripides either.
 

Siddar

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,340
5,864
I knew this movie was doomed when they started attacking 45 year old men. Hint a 45 old today was 13 in 1984. AKA they were the ones most in love with the franchise.

This is like making a beetles movie but really making a spice girls movie instead then attacking the beetles fans for complaining about it.
 

Phelps McManus

<Silver Donator>
214
139
I knew this movie was doomed when they started attacking 45 year old men. Hint a 45 old today was 13 in 1984. AKA they were the ones most in love with the franchise.

This is like making a beetles movie but really making a spice girls movie instead then attacking the beetles fans for complaining about it.
Or maybe they would complain if it was actually a movie about beetles. You suck at spelling and being clever.
 

Siddar

Bronze Baronet of the Realm
6,340
5,864
Or maybe they would complain if it was actually a movie about beetles. You suck at spelling and being clever.
Of course they would complain they always do with remakes, but that doesn't prevent remakes from succeeding.

The intense hostility to this movie has very little to do with it being a remake.
 

Xevy

Log Wizard
8,603
3,816
It's probably going to be a big hit with kids, decent popularity for non-hostile adults, make a good amount of money, and most certainly spawn a new GB franchise. I think of lot of this forum is "get off my lawn"ing pretty hard and hasn't quite realized that they're the vocal minority, not the majority.
 

Utnayan

I Love Utnayan he’s awesome
<Gold Donor>
16,290
12,054
It's probably going to be a big hit with kids, decent popularity for non-hostile adults, make a good amount of money, and most certainly spawn a new GB franchise. I think of lot of this forum is "get off my lawn"ing pretty hard and hasn't quite realized that they're the vocal minority, not the majority.
I think you better build a bunker.