• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).

I get Trekker's point about how the squee'ers and the haters are going off the same information yet only the haters are taken to task with the "It's just a trailer." dismissal of their POV. You just have to bite the bullet on that one because apparently that's just how it is, the arguement never seems to go anywhere.

And Ghostbusters isn't making any statement about equality. Paul Feig just likes to work with women, Melissa McCarthy in particular.
 
I get Trekker's point about how the squee'ers and the haters are going off the same information yet only the haters are taken to task with the "It's just a trailer." dismissal of their POV. You just have to bite the bullet on that one because apparently that's just how it is, the arguement never seems to go anywhere.

And Ghostbusters isn't making any statement about equality. Paul Feig just likes to work with women, Melissa McCarthy in particular.

Loving the stills and posters carries no assertion of loving the film. Those of us who've said we love the look in what we've been shown (like me) mean precisely what we've said.

The so-called haters on the other hand have been saying from the get-go that they won't like the whole film.

There's no hypocrisy in being critical of the idea of hating the film before it's out while simultaneously squeeing over the look as it's been presented so far.
 
And Ghostbusters isn't making any statement about equality. Paul Feig just likes to work with women, Melissa McCarthy in particular.

A male director who prefers to work with women, especially in comedy, is still a statement in and of itself. A director is powerful, but Feig is a major figure in Hollywood. For all that Tina Fey has accomplished, she still finds herself debating against male comics who don't think women can be funny. What we're comfortable with and what we're used to seeing can themselves be statements, because that's how we interpret and argue reality. Feig likes to work with women, sure, but casting an all-woman team is a fundamental change to the Ghostbusters formula, no matter how you slice it. They're going to face things that the original boys won't; that can add humor or insight or even simply variety of perspective. It's still a major move for representation, and we can't take that for granted.

It's like the Fast and the Furious movies. The goal wasn't to show diversity, just race cars and explosions and chases. No grand statements on society and equality. And yet, the movies gradually got to the point where it's considered to be one of the most diverse franchises out there, with the box office pull to show that it works. That's an impact.
 
I get Trekker's point about how the squee'ers and the haters are going off the same information yet only the haters are taken to task with the "It's just a trailer." dismissal of their POV. You just have to bite the bullet on that one because apparently that's just how it is, the arguement never seems to go anywhere.

Well, it might help if people stopped projecting a bunch of stuff no one ever said onto simply complementing the look of some character posters. I'm not seeing where "That poster looks great" translates into "This movie is guaranteed to be a flawless masterpiece."

On the flip side, questioning the entire premise of the film and its female-centric casting is a substantially different level of criticism than "That poster looks great," wouldn't you say?

You don't have to "wait and see" to make a judgment call on something tangible like a poster you are actually looking at, but when you're jumping to conclusions about the quality of the final film itself based on vague information, a wait and see approach would seem more prudent.

And Ghostbusters isn't making any statement about equality. Paul Feig just likes to work with women, Melissa McCarthy in particular.

No one's saying it's like a Rosa Parks moment or anything, but it's nice to see traditionally male comedic roles and films being carried by a female cast and doing well at the box office. Why this is so threatening or worthy of scorn to some people is beyond me. And the reverse sexism bullshit are the ramblings of the privileged and those completely lacking in self-awareness.
 
I like the posters. I am still a little unsure of the movie, but that is because the trailers I've seen for Melissa McCarthy and Paul Feig's movies haven't appealed to me. That has nothing to do with her being a woman, their style of humor simply doesn't appeal to me. Honestly, if this wasn't Ghostbusters I wouldn't be paying any attention to it, but since I love the franchise I'm trying to keep an open mind.
 
So, let me get this straight.

People who hate on, are not passionate about or on board with, this movie are haters/extreme trolls or whatever because their opinions are based on what very little information we've gotten so far.

*But* it's perfectly okay to squee on and "love" this movie and the characters because we've gotten a picture of them in their uniforms. (And didn't we already get this several months ago with them in front of the new Ecto-1?)

Aren't the Haters and the Squeers basing their opinions on the same amount of information? How is it possible to "already love" an actress in this movie because now you've seen her in a khaki onesie while wearing a plastic prop on her back? But *that's* okay. It's not, however, okay to dislike an actress in this movie because all of the other comedy movies she's done has been centered around, "Look at me! I'm fat and it's awkward for me to do things in normal-sized people society!" and there's little reason to suspect this outing will be anything different.

Look, I'm on the fence with this movie. Like I am with the new Star Trek movie. I'm not passionate about it one way or the other. I'll end up seeing both, and both of them look potentially good, but nothing I've seen/heard has driven me to passion one way or another.

With Star Trek, I accepted after ID that "this isn't my Star Trek" because, damn that movie was flawed. I'm not a hater on it, I just didn't care much for it and was mostly neutral on the first one. It's not made for people like me so, fine, it's there and I don't have to accept it as any form of "canon" since it has no impact on the "prime universe." The new trailer looks "good" but it doesn't look like Star Trek. Looks like a typical summer action movie. Which, fine, whatever. I'll go see it, probably like it, but for me it's not Star Trek.

With this movie, I'm still neutral. I've yet to see anything to push me one way or another. I don't see the sense in going with an all-female cast (I can see having female members of the team, but why go all-female? Isn't that sexist too?) but until I see some footage in a trailer or something it's hard to know much more about this movie than, "they have four women in jumpsuits with a particle-accelerator on their backs driving around in a mid-80s station wagon."

Yeah, that's something to squee over or even say, "worst movie ever" over.
45180-The-Dude--I-cant-be-worried-ab-WBED_zpsvmwgn3ww.gif
 
I can see having female members of the team, but why go all-female? Isn't that sexist too?

You don't understand the concept of sexism. Your privilege is showing, you might want to see to that.

Making a movie with an all-male cast is the norm or very common at least in the scifi genre. And that norm is sexist. That doesn't mean that all movies with a male cast are sexist.

What we need is diversity. Movies with mixed casts, all female casts, all male casts, it all works. Just don't always give us the male dominance. And that is why we need all male cast movies the least currently. That's why some people are trying to break the mold right now.
 
A tie-in game is in development, at least according to a Retail Merchandiser article:

a new full-fledged “Ghostbusters” video game from Activision will release alongside the movie on the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.

Link

There's no other source for this, though, so take it with a grain of salt.
 
A tie-in game would seem to be a likely proposition. What is much more telling is if it will be worth a damn as most end up being worth little more than coasters.
 
I heard about this earlier, but the article I read said they weren't sure if the game was for the original movies or the new one. I would assume it would be for the new one, but I don't know if I'd say it's a certainty.
The article mentions three animated series, but I only know of two, The Real Ghostbusters, and Extreme. Are they confusing the totally separate Filmation cartoon with the movie Ghostbusters, or is there a third series that Wikipedia and I don't know about?
 
It's definitely not the best-researched article, considering it also says that Ramis and Aykroyd wrote The Video Game.
 
First image of Chris Hemsworth's character, Kevin:

gbhemsworth_zpso5jgzyk1.jpg


New pics of the GBs here.

Official page for the movie is up. It offers a bit of background on each Ghostbuster.

Patty Tolan is a municipal historian.
Abby Yates is a paranormal researcher.
Erin Gilbert is a particle physicist and "academic firebrand".
Jillian Holtzmann is a nuclear engineer and munitions expert.

Also, Paul Feig has tweeted that the first trailer should be out by the end of the month.
 
The article mentions three animated series, but I only know of two, The Real Ghostbusters, and Extreme. Are they confusing the totally separate Filmation cartoon with the movie Ghostbusters, or is there a third series that Wikipedia and I don't know about?

They must be mistaking Filmation's Ghostbusters for a version of the Columbia series.



New Lego!
http://lego.gizmodo.com/the-new-ghostbusters-lego-sets-have-finally-been-reveal-1757314919
Love Kate McKinnon's mini-fig (gotta learn the char names...)

I love it that she looks like The Real Ghostbusters' Egon.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top