Alright, I didn’t want to have to do this…
You guys want a Top Critic, you’ve got one:
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/08/movies/film-ghostbusters-with-murray-and-aykroyd.html
1 Like
It would also be one of those lies I was just talking about, as it has an average of 6.3 by the top critics and out of 49 reviews it got 29 fresh reviews. See what I mean by warping the truth?
I just CANNOT grasp why you people didn’t like the movie!? I cant. Yes the ending wasn’t exactly what I had hoped for. The over all movie though was good. It had good action and I enjoyed the humor and energy from Characters like Hotzmann.
yes I didn’t like the car in some ways.
I didn’t like the ghosts blowing up into ectoplasm.
There are some things I would have liked to had seen different but I truly enjoyed this movie. Having female Ghostbusters is great. Now the sisters can play with their brothers and don’t have to pretend to only be Janine. Its great. why hate that?
My 4 year old loves it. That’s all that matters to me. Don’t care that you (20-30 somethings) didn’t like it. I just don’t understand why!?
2 Likes
I can totally get that not all fans are on board, and it’s perfectly fine to dislike the movie.
I just don’t get why some need to invent ‘facts’ to justify their dislike.
2 Likes
agreed. My brother is also a die hard Ghosthead like myself. He would NOT see the movie though. He didn’t even give it a chance. He just said, “It just looks horrible” okay well. If someone watched it and told me they hated the story. They didn’t like the humor and they hated the car and the packs and the acting, that’s fine. I can respect that as well. I am sure that the people who hated the film they watched still appreciated the cameos and tributes paid in the film though.
Those are two of the things I didn’t care for either - to me the car looked like the red section was pink. One of my first thoughts was OMG, they didn’t make it pink, did they? But no, just the lighting made it look like that. And it did bother me that they were blowing up and shredding ghosts, that just didn’t seem right.
But all in all, it was funny and the audience kept laughing. You don’t see that much anymore.
How true that is!
I mean, it IS a different idea of it though and I respect that also. I appreciate a different story. A different take on the idea. At first I questioned “why bother trapping the ghosts and containing them if they are just blowing them up and shredding them” but then it made me realize in that story they only wantedto catch it as proof and to study it. I can understand and appreciate it. I would rather have the sequel explain that you cannot just make them disappear. Just like in the end of the movie when Holtzmann said something like
“I don’t know where the ghosts end up, some where in Michigan I think”
or what ever she said, it would be awesome if that story is much like the one episode of TRGB when that guy stole the equipment plans and built BUSTER the Robot and all that energy and all the ghosts ended up building up into one area. Because it makes sense you cant make matter disappear and not go somewhere. (If spirits and ghosts actually are a different form of matter. lol)
So what does this prove exactly? That one critic of a major publication at the time didn’t like the Original Ghostbusters movie? Because that’s what I am getting. Which still… doesn’t really prove anything. There were major critics this time around that Liked ATC, in fact going by the percentages there were actual MORE top critics that liked the movie as opposed to didn’t like it. But it wasn’t as big a majority as the overall percentage.
I mean I know what you’re trying to do with this, its just pretty blatantly disingenuous. Do you want me to go fish through some newspaper archives of 1984 and reply back with 2 good Ghostbusters reviews? It’s a slow work day – I have spare time.
But please don’t act like that is some kind of ‘ace in the hole’ reveal with the ‘you asked for it!’ type attitude.
1 Like
It proves “Top Critic” doesn’t necessarily mean “More credible.” No more, no less. And I was directing it at people who insisted that a lower Top Critic score somehow “proved” that ATC was hated overall.
And if you’re looking for disingenuous, look at the comment I was replying to.
I get the impression a lot of them can’t get past the idea that the humor isn’t as “smart” as the originals.
Well, it actually does mean ‘more credible.’ That’s why they are Top Critics. There is actually a set of criteria they have to meet for that. Now does that make their opinion gospel? No, of course not. But, I expect a bit more integrity from a top critic then I would any web site that writes a review and gets thrown into the over all percentage pot on RT.
And even with that. The Top Critics are at 59% – which, while not meeting the arbitrary criteria of a “FRESH!” its not overwhelmingly horrible like a sub-50 would be.
My biggest conclusions at looking at all the RT stuff is: Top Critics were tepid, Overall was a bit forgiving, The Audience was being trolled, and Rotten Tomatoes in General doesn’t mean nearly as much as people think it does.
I wouldn’t use a word like ‘smart’ but I would say that the tone of the comedy is starkly different from the original. Which is easily the worst sin this movie made.
If not for the movie nods and cameo’s I don’t think I would have sat through the whole film. I honestly felt the script was rushed and Katie probably penned it while watching the Real Ghostbusters dvd set in one weekend. The question of the containment unit does bug me.
How would they had transferred the containment unit to the fire house at the end of the movie? That could have been an opportunity to show off some new kind of vehicles like a modded RV from the comic or even a military vehicle like this one here:
This would have been another good way to flood the toy market. Someone needs to fire the marketing exec in charge of the GB 2016 department.
That’s just it though!!
There is some slapstick humor in there but there is also very creative humor in there as well!
[spoiler]For example:
When they were asking about ed mulgrave and how they said he had been dead for years so they don’t know how he came to them asking about the mansion and then he was like “oh that’s his son”[/spoiler]
that was funny clever shit!
1 Like
Seeing that the Ecto-1 was an ambulance I would have rather them used a more iconic 1984 GMC Ambulance than shoe-horning in a caddy hearse.
Something like that tricked out in GB hardware could have been amazing.
well. when they were told they had the government budget at the end I would have thought that not only would they have shown the firehouse with them in it, but they would have shown something like this…
You can also expect a bit more snobbery from a top critic occasionally, which is what I see in those GB84 reviews. Which is why I don’t mind including the occasional “populace” critic being included in the mix. I mean that is what GB is all about. The people having their own voice apart from authority figures.
I’m not sure where you’re getting that the audience was trolled. If anything, certain parts of the audience trolled RT by voting before likely ever seeing the movie.
Opinions man. That was not funny nor clever, to me. “Oh, that’s his son!” Hahaha… shoot me.
I know, exactly! That’s a joke specifically written for older audiences.