It’s nice to see movies with great actors who aren’t necessarily pretty people. I don’t go to a movie based on what the actors look like.
They are comedians who transitioned into dramatic roles. Actors who occasionally happen to get hired to do a comedy are not the same thing.
Why is that a problem? Why refer to that as a “just”?
Guys, Ghostbusters is a comedy, first and foremost. Always has been. To go out of your way to find non-comedians for this movie is very strange.
McKinnon just won an Emmy for SNL. Jones was also a presenter at the Emmys. No, SNL is not the cultural phenomenon it was in the 70s, but it’s still very popular.
Oh hey, now, I did* not *say that, hehe. I think all four guys were very attractive; they didn’t need to be male models. It’s just a shame that some male fans can’t be open to the GB16 girls in the same way. (I get that you’re approaching this from a business standpoint.)
It’s not just women. The new male star wars villain was criticised, by women , for being ugly . ATC needed to do something different , doesn’t matter if it was good movie, it lost money. ATC failed to get people to go to the movies.
He has a lot of fans, but sure, I don’t doubt that women can be shallow too, lol.
Depends on your priorities.
Which most likely means the marketing failed, not the movie. Suicide Squad built up more hype and people were determined to like it no matter what. The same way they were determined to hate GB16 no matter what. From that perspective, GB16 isn’t what failed, and Suicide Squad isn’t what succeeded. It’s all about the audience’s biases, and nothing about the movies.
I like the fact that your getting people dressing up as holtzmann, the fan props are awsome. I think it might even have brought a different demographic into the gb community. If i knew i was going to a bunch of movies from Ghostbusters I wouldnt care. Atc is not a stain. It was just the first Ghostbusters movie in along time and since it failed it will probably be along time until we get another
Id agree that it really isnt about the movie, but im sure theres things they could have done to make it more marketable
:/id bet my house we see another harley quinn movie before we see ghostbusters..
Again, depends on your definition of failed. I do think the movie challenged people’s perceptions, certainly a lot more than your typical blockbuster clone.
And it will most likely be rated miserably by critics, as usual, lol. Even the fans who flock to see these DC movies are consistently disappointed. They just can’t bare to let these movies ever fail (same with Star Wars). Again, they think it’s a sports game where they have to “win.”
But the thing is, studios *do *care about reputation, in addition to money.
Perhaps they should have drawn more of a direct connection to the original movies. I’d certainly have no problem with that. I just think fans hugely overreacted to not getting it.
For the record, my understanding is that the animated feature is a go regardless.
Except Jason Statham. That man can move.
Even though you all know this already, I feel the need to restate my opinion on the casting choices. I like all of the actresses and from what I’ve seen them in I think they’re all quite talented, and I’m glad they are the ones they picked.
I do too. I was not familiar with any of them before and I really enjoyed their interaction. Will look for more of their stuff.
And - this movie got me interested in Ghostbusters again. :love:
Do I think Sony screwed up?
No, I don’t think.
I KNOW Sony screwed up. Thankfully the low box office will hopefully make Sony go in an entirely new direction.
Has anyone actually talked to non-fanboys about the movie? Like in real life when people aren’t concerned with being MRA’s or SJW’s or anything?
Sony produces cheap looking, product placement filled ■■■■ comedies that bank on name recognition (actor or franchise) over quality or content. See also: any Adam Sandler film. Sony had no good will and this looked like Pixels 2.
The general public isn’t a big fan of remakes. See nearly every franchise reboot or remake in modern history. For every Transformers, there are 5 RoboCops.
People aren’t concerned with “fictional continuity” but they do have characters and themes they like and identify with. I would say most people don’t have any interest in Gozer or Zuul or any of that, but they do have fond memories and respect for the original cast and the original characters. People DO want to see these characters again.
Sony largely manufactured the sexist controversy for publicity and it was very off-putting. The majority of people and fans had no problem with women being Ghostbusters, despite the manufactured buzz.
People can see through this nonsense. There are always crazy people. People who threatened suicide over 50 Shades of Gray casting or who wanted to kill the lead in a Fault in Our Stars or cut themselves because Bieber changed his haistyle. Oh, crazy fans harassed Paul Fieg on Twitter? Big deal.
Sony doesn’t have a genuine message about equality. The controversy is a stunt, and a bad one, and people saw through it.
Even Melissa McCarthy said in an interview that these sexists were a minority and they made a mistake engaging them publicly.
People didn’t care for the demonization of the first film. If you’re going to pick a film to label sexist and remake, why pick Ghostbusters? This also lead to a lot of SJW’s griping about the ■■■■■■■ ghost and nonsense articles with headlines like “the Original Ghostbusters Wasn’t Even That Good…”
I read a review for the new film that called out the original because Dana was a damsel in distress, a trophy for the male characters and pointed out the sexist symbolism of a female character being “literally eaten by her kitchen.”
Nobody cares what “fans” like us think. What matters is what the general audience thinks. And, shockingly, people liked the original generation-defining blockbuster and don’t really like it when people talk shit about it.
The trailers were a disaster. The word of mouth was “meh.” Poor opening weekend box office scared off stragglers.
This was a master class in how NOT to market a film or launch a franchise.
I didn’t hate the film. I didn’t think it was especially well made or funny, but there are worse ways to spend 90 minutes. At least we got some Ghostbusters magnets and air fresheners and ■■■■ out of it.
On the “non-fanboy front”:
At my first viewing, I saw it with four people where I was the only guy in the group, three out of the four had seen the original Ghostbusters as memory serves, one hadn’t. As memory also serves the three of the four who had seen the original enjoyed the original, but were casual fans, not an obsessive like me. All four of them enjoyed the reboot.
My second viewing, I saw it with two other friends, one male and one female. When the film was first announced, the male friend had held a similar opinion to me, that the film would be terrible. All three of us had enjoyed the classic, and as it turned out, we ended up enjoying the reboot.
My final viewing was with my twin brother, who used to be a big fan when we were young (we both had the Kenner toys), but had grown into a casual fan as other interests took a higher priority. He had a healthy respect for the original, and he enjoyed the reboot.
Most of the general public and non fanboys I’ve talked about it with are all very “meh” on it.
I wanted to like it. I was in Phantom Menace style denial for about a week until I started asking questions like, “how does throwing one ghost into two others accomplish anything?”
I’ve talked to tons of people outside my circle of friends about it. Some places like movie theaters, conventions, recently at a renaissance festival, at work, at the comic shop and even today at a Spirit Halloween store.
Conversations come up when I’m wearing a GB themed shirt, in costume, buying something GB related, etc. Not just random people who pop out “what did you think of the new film” on the street.
The consistent themes I’ve noticed are: a reverence for the original, a bitterness toward remakes (I hear “Hollywood is out of ideas” a lot), middle of the road to mildly positive reviews and lots of people who wanted to see a “passing the torch” moment if not a direct sequel.
Less but still surprisingly common: bitterness with Sony or the state of modern comedies and annoyance with how politicized the movie was.
This movie was such an incredible misfire. Again, maybe not in content because that’s subjective. But in everything else… what a monumental cluster.
Yup, and without exception they said some form of, “It was fun…what was the big deal again?”
And btw, conventions and comic shops aren’t where you go if you want to find non-fanboys/girls. 
In general, I’ve only seen people’s affection for GB to grow as a result of the reboot giving the franchise an injection of attention. That is the primary benefit of reboots. In no way is that a “monumental cluster.” I’ll reserve that distinction for DC’s recent round of comic book movies, lol. Good thing they have fans who are more than happy to torture themselves. The DC movies are rapidly becoming like Star Wars – The Franchise That’s Too Big to Fail. Good thing they have whipping posts like GB16.
By the way, I was referring to Ghostbusters fanboys.
I think it’s safe to say Sony screwed up. The film lost a ton of money and divided fandom like no film I’ve ever seen. It’s like they didn’t even try. Just look at the marketing. I’ve never seen such amateur work for a big budget release. Maybe since at least “Pluto Nash” ? Then we have the movie itself which is so bland & humourless even Bill Murray came out looking bad. That’s no easy task to accomplish. Look at his cameo in Zombieland. It’s easily the funniest part of the movie. Look at his work in ATC! How in the world did they think that was funny?
Paul Feig will always have my respect for Freaks & Geeks, but he was just the wrong guy for the GB job. His only other PG-13 movie was “Unaccompanied Minor’s”. Yikes!
Obviously the biggest mistake was making a Reboot instead of a sequel. Sony misjudged how important the characters of the original are. Sony thought the money was in “Ghostbusting”. Nope. It’s in Ray, Venkman, Winston and Egon. That’s what audiences wanted. That’s what the majority of fans wanted. We didn’t care how old they were, we just wanted to spend time with some old friends working on a new case. The other thing Sony didn’t think about? Anticipation. How long was GB3 in the works? How many times did it make the news over the last 20 years? An insane amount. A ridiculous amount. You don’t screw with that level of exposure by erasing 20 years of hype. That was a massive mistake. Sony and Feig went out of their way to make this a reboot when you consider that the original film has the plot spelled out for future generations! And I quote: “The franchise rights alone will make us rich beyond our wildest dreams!” That’s the movie, right there! That’s all Sony had to do! But no. Instead we got this sad excuse “Ghostbusters In Name Only” movie.
The only person that felt like a true comedic GB character was Holtzman. She owned the film. Imagine her in a GB3? I get chills thinking about it. She was so great that it made the movie around her all the more depressing. How could they get one thing so right and everything else so wrong. I’d love to learn more about the genesis of the Holtzman character. Maybe the blu ray will have something like that.