Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).

[Marsden]

Here's a strange comment, I went to the movies today and the 4 Ghostbusters posters I saw hanging up in the lobby looked pretty cool. Didn't like the trailer but the posters were nice.

Hopefully it will be a good movie, I'm really undecided about the whole thing, but how could you without seeing it?

 

[Timby]

Why the unprecedented negative reaction to the trailer

1) Much as we'd like to pretend otherwise, misogyny is rather rampant across the Internet.
2) Nerds are mad that they aren't being pandered to.

 

[Timby]

I mean, seriously, here's the long and the short of it: If the movie is good, it'll be good on its own merits. If the movie sucks, it will suck on its own lack of merits. The main cast members not having testicles will not have any bearing on its quality.

Simple as that,

 

[JD]

Sure it has an effect on the quality when the number one reason for a reboot is about selling (pushing) certain performers, instead of producing a concept that will pull in as many audience members as possible / a concept the people actually have an interest in seeing. How many in social media are thrilled about this project? Why the unprecedented negative reaction to the trailer, and certain ideas known to be in the film?

They're some of the most popular female comics out there right now, they really don't need to be pushed. Gee after this conversation and Supergirl, I'm starting to see a bit of a trend.........

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

JD, you see what your (apparently) one-sided political world view allows you to see. Again, you did not answer the question: How many in social media are thrilled about this project? Why the unprecedented negative reaction to the trailer, and certain ideas known to be in the film?

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

1) Much as we'd like to pretend otherwise, misogyny is rather rampant across the Internet.

Where genre films are concerned, i've thought it exists in The Walking Dead community regarding the over-the-top negativity about the Carol Peletier character (after years of careful development, they still write her off as some fake "superwoman"). On the other hand, I do not see it in the forthcoming Wonder Woman film, where many thought she was the breakout character from Dawn of Justice and want to see more. So, if misogyny exists, I would not say it is a sweeping problem in discussions of genre productions.

2) Nerds are mad that they aren't being pandered to.

Why do reboots get the greenlight? Studios are attempting to cash-in on an existing fanbase / cultural awareness of a loved / successful property. Your "nerds" are a sizable amount of that fanbase. This is not some new creation breaking new ground, but leeching off of the success of an established property, so who is the studio expecting to reach?

 

[Saul]

People don't like other people's reactions to the trailer and need to label them as misogynist or uber nerds in order to negate their opinions.

 

[Greg Cox]

There's another reason for remakes and reboots. Beyond the name-recognition value, which has a certain cachet, there's also the reasoning that "well, this worked before so it might work again."

There's a reason that they keep remaking TEN LITTLE INDIANS over and over again, and it's not to pander to Agatha Christie fanboys. It's because it's a solid, dependable story that's a proven crowd-pleaser.

Again, when they remade GHOST BREAKERS with Bob Hope back in 1940, it wasn't because they were going after fans of the previous silent version or the original 1909 stage play. It was because the concept had proven it had legs, generation after generation, so why not dust it off again?

Ditto for the remake with Lewis & Martin. That wasn't aimed at Bob Hope fans; it just made a good vehicle for the latest "hot" comedians.

 

[ancient]

Is a remake done by Tim Burton starring Johnny Depp its own genre?

 

[Greg Cox]

Why the unprecedented negative reaction to the trailer, and certain ideas known to be in the film?

By coincidence, there was an article about this in USA TODAY this morning. Seems there was a deliberate campaign to downvote the trailer on YouTube, even though audience interest is registering as high at Fandango and elsewhere.

Which implies to me that there's more going on than just "boy, that trailer sucks" or "I don't like remakes."

Sounds more like, yes, some sort of reactionary backlash to women infringing on "our" turf, coupled with the usual generational chauvinism that assumes that one's own sentimental nostalgia for the previous version trumps any attempt to update the material.

 

[B.J.]

Is a remake done by Tim Burton starring Johnny Depp its own genre?

Don't forget the music by Danny Elfman!

 

[Greg Cox]

Don't forget the music by Danny Elfman!

Gotta admit, I love the soundtrack to SLEEPY HOLLOW, even though I only saw the move once.

 

[JD]

JD, you see what your (apparently) one-sided political world view allows you to see. Again, you did not answer the question: How many in social media are thrilled about this project? Why the unprecedented negative reaction to the trailer, and certain ideas known to be in the film?

I don't really follow social media, so I couldn't tell you.
I don't have a problem with people not liking the trailer if they don't like what's in the trailer. I just think it's unfair to not like the trailer just because it happens to be a Ghostbusters trailer.
Honestly, I've never seen a Paul Feig/Melissa McCarthy movie before, because what I've seen of the movies hasn't really interested me. In fact Ghostbusters is the first movie of theirs I've even considered seeing.
It just bugs me when people judge a movie based on factors other than what's actually in the movies.
I'm not defending the movie because I was overly enthused about the trailer, I'm honestly not even sure if I'm going to see it in theaters. I just think the movie is being treated unfairly simply because it's a remake that happens to have genderswapped the leads.

 

[Greg Cox]

Lord knows I would like to think that people were simply reacting to the trailer, and not that there's some sort of sexist backlash involved, but I'm not that naive. Tearing down outmoded social hierarchies tends to rub some folks the wrong way. Go figure.

Doesn't mean it's a bad idea . . ..

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Lord knows I would like to think that people were simply reacting to the trailer, and not that there's some sort of sexist backlash involved, but I'm not that naive. Tearing down outmoded social hierarchies tends to rub some folks the wrong way. Go figure.

Come on Greg--don't give into applying that boogeyman cudgel to every negative reaction to a film that is changing something, when the case--more often than not--the reboot / reimagining is a crass misuse of a loved property in order to sell some new face, ideology or just milk the tit of past successes until its dry. I see the lack of interest and/or disgust no different than that received by the failed adaptations (critically, or at the box office) of The Avengers (the Steed & Peel Avengers), Lost in Space, Land of the Lost, Dark Shadows, etc.

The assumption that the cultural power of a property can just be pulled over an entirely different body like skin is one of greed and arrogance. Yeah, the entertainment business is about profits, but the audience is about not having crap of questionable creativity and/or intent packaged and sold as a birthday gift, either.

Tearing down outmoded social hierarchies tends to rub some folks the wrong way. Go figure.

Funny you should say that, because in a mere 7 months, a man who is accused of being the bloated, breathing embodiment of those "outmoded social hierarchies" has a very real chance of becoming the next president of the United States. That says something about the true direction or tone of American society.

 

[Aldo]

Maybe saying everyone who dislikes the trailer is sexist or a misogynist is a gross generalization. But there is a part of fandom that has a very real problem with women invading their turf. Look at the outcry (granted it was a minority, but a loud minority) who called for boycotts of the last Star Wars movie because they dared to have a female lead.

They may not be as many in number as the people who just think this doesn't look very good, but people who dislike this based on the fact that it's a movie with female leads are out there. They do exist.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Does this ever happen with original properties? I think as much as there are sexist/racist things going on that there's a problem with change itself.

 

[Greg Cox]

Funny you should say that, because in a mere 7 months, a man who is accused of being the bloated, breathing embodiment of those "outmoded social hierarchies" has a very real chance of becoming the next president of the United States. That says something about the true direction or tone of American society.

My point exactly. The backlash against the new GHOSTBUSTERS is not taking place in a vacuum. I'd like to think it's just the usual overwrought nostalgia you get whenever an old property gets revamped ("the original was good enough for me, damn it"), but in these days of Trump, GamerGate,etc . . .yeah, it's hard not to see the whole GHOSTBUSTERS flap as part of a larger culture war or counter-revolution or whatever.

 

[Marsden]

I actually see a lot of pretend problems that people complain about while they do nothing about real problems. Having all women cast as Ghostbusters is a problem, really? And those other things, wth is gamergate and sad puppies and other goofy shit that people that wouldn't exist if some people didn't live on the internet instead of the real world.

 

[ancient]

Apparently, some people think that after decades of female characters being accepted & uncontroversial, that suddenly we all hate women because of a shitty cash grab remake with amazingly lazy manufactured controversy as viral marketing.

Now if you'll all excuse me, I have to go watch my favorite movie, White Chicks. I like it because it has men in it.