Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I feel like for some here, yes, it would be called a chick flick, with all the limitations that come with it.

Maybe even the same for the Alien movies, too. Heck, one of them had Ripley protecting a little girl! Ew cooties and estrogen.

Actually, I enjoyed both Kill Bill and Alien/Aliens.

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

Because we disagree with your identification of Bridesmaids as an example.

Ah!

A direct answer. How refreshing.

I can respect that you disagree. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

As a woman I'd love to hear your definition.

"As a woman".

Curious.

I find it interesting that you should preface your thought with those first three words.

Before I answer, and to make sure I fully understand the question: What does being a woman have to do with the fact that you want to hear my definition?

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Actually, I enjoyed both Kill Bill and Alien/Aliens.

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

Because we disagree with your identification of Bridesmaids as an example.

Yeah. The Joy Luck Club is arguably a chick flick. How Stella Got Her Groove Back is arguably a chick flick. The Notebook and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie are largely regarded as chick flicks.

But Bridesmaids is a zany, off-color comedy. And pretty hilarious, too.

Greg, Bridesmaids has "chick flick" sensibilities.

Roger Ebert said so himself in his review of the film, and I respect his opinion on films over most ---if not all---critics. Not that I always agree with him. In fact, I don't agree that this was a particularly good movie, which he did. But I do agree that there is a chick-flicky quality to Bridesmaids. I'm just not sure why I seem to be the only one that sees it in this particular board.

Or maybe nobody who wants to argue against me wants to admit to seeing that quality?

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I feel like for some here, yes, it would be called a chick flick, with all the limitations that come with it.

Maybe even the same for the Alien movies, too. Heck, one of them had Ripley protecting a little girl! Ew cooties and estrogen.

Actually, I enjoyed both Kill Bill and Alien/Aliens.

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

Because we disagree with your identification of Bridesmaids as an example.

Ding ding ding.

I mentioned many many pages ago that my friends and I -- all male -- willingly watched Bridesmaids. Most of us enjoyed it, but whether or not we liked it, that opinion had no bearing on us giving it a try. That it involved women seemed natural and we thought nothing of it, not as a gimmick, not as some sort of cynical sales ploy, but simply as part of the premise that the movie asks us to accept as a part of the characters' lives.

No one will ever convince my friends and I to go watch "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days." On the contrary, we had pizza and beer ready for Bridesmaids.

 

[Dr. Funkenstein]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Yeah. The Joy Luck Club is arguably a chick flick. How Stella Got Her Groove Back is arguably a chick flick. The Notebook and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie are largely regarded as chick flicks.

But Bridesmaids is a zany, off-color comedy. And pretty hilarious, too.

It's commonly described as a subcategory of chick flicks: Chick flick comedies. Hell, sometimes its even called "a chick flick for men."

And a chick flick is any movie largely targeted at women, since by default its assumed most movies are targeted at guys. It has nothing to do with being a romance or tearjerker, except that those types of movies are almost always regarded as chick flicks.

You know, it's the whole square = rectangle but rectangle != square thing.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Actually, I enjoyed both Kill Bill and Alien/Aliens.

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

Because we disagree with your identification of Bridesmaids as an example.

Ding ding ding.

I mentioned many many pages ago that my friends and I -- all male -- willingly watched Bridesmaids. Most of us enjoyed it, but whether or not we liked it, that opinion had no bearing on us giving it a try. That it involved women seemed natural and we thought nothing of it, not as a gimmick, not as some sort of cynical sales ploy, but simply as part of the premise that the movie asks us to accept as a part of the characters' lives.

No one will ever convince my friends and I to go watch "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days." On the contrary, we had pizza and beer ready for Bridesmaids.

You guys had beer and pizza while watching Bridesmaids, eh?

That's cute. Real cute.

Yeah. The Joy Luck Club is arguably a chick flick. How Stella Got Her Groove Back is arguably a chick flick. The Notebook and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie are largely regarded as chick flicks.

But Bridesmaids is a zany, off-color comedy. And pretty hilarious, too.

It's commonly described as a subcategory of chick flicks: Chick flick comedies. Hell, sometimes its even called "a chick flick for men."

And a chick flick is any movie largely targeted at women, since by default its assumed most movies are targeted at guys. It has nothing to do with being a romance or tearjerker, except that those types of movies are almost always regarded as chick flicks.

You know, it's the whole square = rectangle but rectangle != square thing.

To quote Cyke:

DING DING DING!

Thanks, Doctor.

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Because we disagree with your identification of Bridesmaids as an example.

Yeah. The Joy Luck Club is arguably a chick flick. How Stella Got Her Groove Back is arguably a chick flick. The Notebook and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie are largely regarded as chick flicks.

But Bridesmaids is a zany, off-color comedy. And pretty hilarious, too.

Greg, Bridesmaids has "chick flick" sensibilities.

Roger Ebert said so himself in his review of the film, and I respect his opinion on films over most ---if not all---critics. Not that I always agree with him. In fact, I don't agree that this was a particularly good movie, which he did. But I do agree that there is a chick-flicky quality to Bridesmaids. I'm just not sure why I seem to be the only one that sees it in this particular board.

To quote Ebert:

Did I mention the movie was produced by Apatow? Love him or not, he's consistently involved with movies that connect with audiences, and "Bridesmaids" seems to be a more or less deliberate attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy. It definitively proves that women are the equal of men in vulgarity, sexual frankness, lust, vulnerability, overdrinking and insecurity. And it moves into areas not available to men, for example the scene when they're all trying on dresses at a bridal shop and the lunch they've just shared suddenly reappears, if you get my drift.

It's funny that you said Aldo was a master of taking things out of context, and yet here you are doing it with Ebert's review of Bridesmaids. Yes, he said Chick Flick but he also didn't let that detract from his review; if anything, he views the movie as questioning and providing unique twists on the tropes of the "Chick Flick."

I bolded part of his review because of this: we're condemning Ghostbusters 3 because it's all-women and that's seen to be detrimental gimmick to the movie. Yet here's Ebert saying that not only can women match men in certain areas, but women's stories open up narrative possibilities that wouldn't be explored if it was simply a mens-only movie. If, as Ebert points out, women are the equal to men in those areas, then a movie shouldn't be presumed to be derivative of men then.

By the way, since you've been predicting the doom of Ghostbusters 3 by comparing it (VERY) negatively to Bridesmaids, I'd like to point out, then, that Ebert gave the movie 3.5/4 stars. He loved it and thought it was a great comedy.

You guys had beer and pizza while watching Bridesmaids, eh?

That's cute. Real cute.

Yes, it's cute that a group of men are secure enough in their masculinity that they could watch a movie and not condemn it along gender lines. I'd rather be that guy than someone who writes off a movie as not good enough for men simply because it stars 4 women.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Yeah. The Joy Luck Club is arguably a chick flick. How Stella Got Her Groove Back is arguably a chick flick. The Notebook and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie are largely regarded as chick flicks.

But Bridesmaids is a zany, off-color comedy. And pretty hilarious, too.

Greg, Bridesmaids has "chick flick" sensibilities.

Roger Ebert said so himself in his review of the film, and I respect his opinion on films over most ---if not all---critics. Not that I always agree with him. In fact, I don't agree that this was a particularly good movie, which he did. But I do agree that there is a chick-flicky quality to Bridesmaids. I'm just not sure why I seem to be the only one that sees it in this particular board.

To quote Ebert:

Did I mention the movie was produced by Apatow? Love him or not, he's consistently involved with movies that connect with audiences, and "Bridesmaids" seems to be a more or less deliberate attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy. It definitively proves that women are the equal of men in vulgarity, sexual frankness, lust, vulnerability, overdrinking and insecurity. And it moves into areas not available to men, for example the scene when they're all trying on dresses at a bridal shop and the lunch they've just shared suddenly reappears, if you get my drift.

It's funny that you said Aldo was a master of taking things out of context, and yet here you are doing it with Ebert's review of Bridesmaids. Yes, he said Chick Flick but he also didn't let that detract from his review; if anything, he views the movie as questioning and providing unique twists on the tropes of the "Chick Flick."

I bolded part of his review because of this: we're condemning Ghostbusters 3 because it's all-women and that's seen to be detrimental gimmick to the movie. Yet here's Ebert saying that not only can women match men in certain areas, but women's stories open up narrative possibilities that wouldn't be explored if it was simply a mens-only movie.

By the way, since you've been predicting the doom of Ghostbusters 3 by comparing it (VERY) negatively to Bridesmaids, I'd like to point out, then, that Ebert gave the movie 3.5/4 stars. He loved it and thought it was a great comedy.

Perhaps if you read my post to Greg, that will clarify my position some?

But it seems like you were too quick to jump to conclusions and hit the quote button

Allow me to recap: Ebert called it a chick flick. And as I already mentioned to Greg, if Ebert identifies it as a chick flick, that's good enough for me.

Now I don't always agree with Ebert, and even said so above, because he liked the movie.

But you seem to think I was using Ebert as a weapon when I didn't. I merely used his definition of chick flick in relation to Bridesmaids.

After all, you guys were not challenging my review of Bridesmaids, last time I checked.

You were challenging my defining Bridesmaids as a chick flick.

Which it is.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Yes, it's cute that a group of men are secure enough in their masculinity that they could watch a movie and not condemn it along gender lines. I'd rather be that guy than someone who writes off a movie as not good enough for men simply because it stars 4 women.

You misinterpret me again.

I didn't bash Bridesmaids because it has four women.

I bash it because it's a chick flick.

And I hate chick flicks.

How many times do I have to say it?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Roger Ebert said so himself in his review of the film, and I respect his opinion on films over most ---if not all---critics.

Actually, what Roger Ebert said in his review of Bridesmaids about it was:

[...] "Bridesmaids" seems to be a more or less deliberate attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy. It definitively proves that women are the equal of men in vulgarity, sexual frankness, lust, vulnerability, overdrinking and insecurity.

So, if you're going to parse that sentence as Roger Ebert asserting that Bridesmaids is a Chick Flick (or like a Chick Flick), then you must also parse that sentence as Roger Ebert asserting that Bridesmaids is a Raunch Comedy (or like a Raunch Comedy).

Why are you emphasizing one aspect of what Ebert said, but not the other? Obviously, Ebert's assertion that Bridesmaids is or is like a Raunch Comedy is right in line with what most people in this thread have been saying.

Allow me to recap: Ebert called it a chick flick.

No. He said is was an "attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy."

Arg, Cyke101 beat me to it!

 

[Cyke101]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Greg, Bridesmaids has "chick flick" sensibilities.

Roger Ebert said so himself in his review of the film, and I respect his opinion on films over most ---if not all---critics. Not that I always agree with him. In fact, I don't agree that this was a particularly good movie, which he did. But I do agree that there is a chick-flicky quality to Bridesmaids. I'm just not sure why I seem to be the only one that sees it in this particular board.

To quote Ebert:

Did I mention the movie was produced by Apatow? Love him or not, he's consistently involved with movies that connect with audiences, and "Bridesmaids" seems to be a more or less deliberate attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy. It definitively proves that women are the equal of men in vulgarity, sexual frankness, lust, vulnerability, overdrinking and insecurity. And it moves into areas not available to men, for example the scene when they're all trying on dresses at a bridal shop and the lunch they've just shared suddenly reappears, if you get my drift.

It's funny that you said Aldo was a master of taking things out of context, and yet here you are doing it with Ebert's review of Bridesmaids. Yes, he said Chick Flick but he also didn't let that detract from his review; if anything, he views the movie as questioning and providing unique twists on the tropes of the "Chick Flick."

I bolded part of his review because of this: we're condemning Ghostbusters 3 because it's all-women and that's seen to be detrimental gimmick to the movie. Yet here's Ebert saying that not only can women match men in certain areas, but women's stories open up narrative possibilities that wouldn't be explored if it was simply a mens-only movie.

By the way, since you've been predicting the doom of Ghostbusters 3 by comparing it (VERY) negatively to Bridesmaids, I'd like to point out, then, that Ebert gave the movie 3.5/4 stars. He loved it and thought it was a great comedy.

Perhaps if you read my post to Greg, that will clarify my position some?

But it seems like you were too quick to jump to conclusions and hit the quote button

Allow me to recap: Ebert called it a chick flick. And as I already mentioned to Greg, if Ebert identifies it as a chick flick, that's good enough for me.

Now I don't always agree with Ebert, and even said so above, because he liked the movie.

But you seem to think I was using Ebert as a weapon when I didn't. I merely used his definition of chick flick in relation to Bridesmaids.

After all, you guys were not challenging my review of Bridesmaids, last time I checked.

You were challenging my defining Bridesmaids as a chick flick.

Which it is.

Are you kidding me? The last time I mentioned my friends and I watching Bridesmaids all those pages ago, it was *because* of your review of the movie and then bashing GB3 as derivative of Bridesmaids as nothing but pure chick flick. You feared that the reboot would be a chick flick -- and yet here you mention a review that speaks well of an all-women cast as a capable comedy.

But one thing about using Ebert -- his reviews tend to be highly intersectional. If he talked about women in Bridesmaids, he talked about women and comparison to men, but also its impact on comedy. That's important; nothing is isolated. And because it's highly intersectional, you can't cherry pick and then backtrack when you get called for it. Context is everything when you cite someone's work.

Yes, it's cute that a group of men are secure enough in their masculinity that they could watch a movie and not condemn it along gender lines. I'd rather be that guy than someone who writes off a movie as not good enough for men simply because it stars 4 women.

You misinterpret me again.

I didn't bash Bridesmaids because it has four women.

I bash it because it's a chick flick.

And I hate chick flicks.

How many times do I have to say it?

And you mentioned Ebert, who himself said there was value in that particular movie that was equal to traditional men's comedies. If Ghostbusters is a funny comedy starring mostly men, if you're using a review that Ebert says is the equal to men's comedies, and if you're saying the next GB is just going to be the movie that Ebert refers to, then it stands to reason that Ghostbusters starring women could be funny.

All this gloom and doom prediction about the movie simply because it stars 4 women seems counter to that logic, as if the their gender will lead to the movie's failure. Simply put, women are not allowed to star in stories that feature them and their lives, apparently. But if men want to do it? Go right ahead -- both men and women will flock to see it, and no one will ever question that movie's legitimacy.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I wonder why you guys can't tell the difference between what is a chick flick and what isn't.

As a woman I'd love to hear your definition.

"As a woman".

Curious.

I find it interesting that you should preface your thought with those first three words.

Before I answer, and to make sure I fully understand the question: What does being a woman have to do with the fact that you want to hear my definition?

I didn't expect my comment to scare you so much that you don't dare answer.

The definition of a "chick flick" seems to be very trivial to you considering you said that you don't understand how others have trouble with it.

Now in the past I've noticed that "chick flick" is one of those terms people can't actually agree on, it's just really vague. So when a man implies that the definition is very trivial it makes me curious to find out what he thinks is a typical "chick flick", a movie mostly enjoyed by women. Your tone seemed rather self-impressed so I figured you'd entertain me.

Although it might say more about how you see women than it says about a specific movie.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

To quote Ebert:



It's funny that you said Aldo was a master of taking things out of context, and yet here you are doing it with Ebert's review of Bridesmaids. Yes, he said Chick Flick but he also didn't let that detract from his review; if anything, he views the movie as questioning and providing unique twists on the tropes of the "Chick Flick."

I bolded part of his review because of this: we're condemning Ghostbusters 3 because it's all-women and that's seen to be detrimental gimmick to the movie. Yet here's Ebert saying that not only can women match men in certain areas, but women's stories open up narrative possibilities that wouldn't be explored if it was simply a mens-only movie.

By the way, since you've been predicting the doom of Ghostbusters 3 by comparing it (VERY) negatively to Bridesmaids, I'd like to point out, then, that Ebert gave the movie 3.5/4 stars. He loved it and thought it was a great comedy.

Perhaps if you read my post to Greg, that will clarify my position some?

But it seems like you were too quick to jump to conclusions and hit the quote button

Allow me to recap: Ebert called it a chick flick. And as I already mentioned to Greg, if Ebert identifies it as a chick flick, that's good enough for me.

Now I don't always agree with Ebert, and even said so above, because he liked the movie.

But you seem to think I was using Ebert as a weapon when I didn't. I merely used his definition of chick flick in relation to Bridesmaids.

After all, you guys were not challenging my review of Bridesmaids, last time I checked.

You were challenging my defining Bridesmaids as a chick flick.

Which it is.

Are you kidding me? The last time I mentioned my friends and I watching Bridesmaids all those pages ago, it was *because* of your review of the movie and then bashing GB3 as derivative of Bridesmaids as nothing but pure chick flick. You feared that the reboot would be a chick flick -- and yet here you mention a review that speaks well of an all-women cast as a capable comedy.

But one thing about using Ebert -- his reviews tend to be highly intersectional. If he talked about women in Bridesmaids, he talked about women and comparison to men, but also its impact on comedy. That's important; nothing is isolated. And because it's highly intersectional, you can't cherry pick and then backtrack when you get called for it. Context is everything when you cite someone's work.

I challenge your history.

I mentioned the review only as a source for calling it a chick flick. Nothing more.

As a woman I'd love to hear your definition.

"As a woman".

Curious.

I find it interesting that you should preface your thought with those first three words.

Before I answer, and to make sure I fully understand the question: What does being a woman have to do with the fact that you want to hear my definition?

I didn't expect my comment to scare you so much that you don't dare answer.

Scare me? Ha! Nice try. Try confusing. And you have not answered my attempt to clarify: what does being a woman have to do with your question, please?

The definition of a "chick flick" seems to be very trivial to you considering you said that you don't understand how others have trouble with it.

Now in the past I've noticed that "chick flick" is one of those terms people can't actually agree on, it's just really vague. So when a man implies that the definition is very trivial it makes me curious to find out what he thinks is a typical "chick flick", a movie mostly enjoyed by women. Your tone seemed rather self-impressed so I figured you'd entertain me.

Although it might say more about how you see women than it says about a specific movie.

Oh?

And how do I see women, my presumptuous acquaintance?

You seem to be getting rather...what would be a good word...emotional (?) about this.

I thought we were just talking about movies?

For an entertaining and accurate description on what a chick flick is, read Doc Funk's definition above.

I'll go along with that.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

The only emotion I'm feeling is mild amusement because of your cute condescending tone. You need to try harder.

Oh, men... so overly touchy. Need hugs?

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

Allow me to recap: Ebert called it a chick flick.

No. He said is was an "attempt to cross the Chick Flick with the Raunch Comedy."

Arg, Cyke101 beat me to it!

Sooo he IS inferring that Bridesmaids is a chick flick.

If Bridesmaids is a "cross" between a chick flick and a raunch comedy, then it is a chick flick.

Logicially speaking.

By the way, that means you and Cyke are wrong to say I'm wrong.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

The only emotion I'm feeling is mild amusement because of your cute condescending tone. You need to try harder.

Good! Because this is supposed to be FUN.

Oh, men... so overly touchy. Need hugs?

Hugs are always welcome!

 

[{ Emilia }]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I watched Sons of Anarchy all evening. I can try a biker bear hug but it would probably look incredibly silly.

They're hugging all the time, though. If they ever make a movie it'd be the perfect chick flick. Manly men hugging... a lot.

 

[Amaris]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

OT: I would kill for a Gilmore Girls movie, didn't really like the last season but hey...
Oh no, that would be a 'Chick Flick', wouldn't it... just lost all interest right now! Better check my testosterone level and look if my balls are still in my pants.

I checked, you're still good.

Good, for a moment I was really worried!

If anybody asks, I'm a doctor in 4 states.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I've been meaning to check out Sons of Anarchy, but then I don't want to derail this pleasant conversation we're all having.

 

[{ Emilia }]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

I thought the thread jumped the shark half-way through Trekker's first wall of text.

 

[EnriqueH]

Re: Ghostbusters reboot: We're (almost, maybe, sorta) ready to believe

You're right...(for once in this thread).


JUST KIDDING JUST KIDDING JUST KIDDING!!!!

Seriously though, I really do want to check out Sons of Anarchy. In fact, I saw the first episode and have been meaning to check out the rest of the series.