did she make you a pot
Slimer actually does a nice beefy ■■■■ in the movie when Venkman says his positron collider line.
I must have watched a different version of Ghostbusters than many of you if you seriously think the original contained as much low-brow comedy as you seem to remember.
In fact, Ghostbusters 1984 is ruining the childhood of Gb16 fans.
(Sarcasm)
1 Like
Well, if not Ghostbusters, then let’s take a quick look at Ghostbusters II:
*Egon saying his students would be more interested in his epididymis.
*Egon, Peter and Dana talking about Oscar’s “stool sample”.
*Egon saying he wanted to run a gynaecological test on Dana, and Peter agreeing with him.
*That moment where Egon and/or Ray silently admitted to sleeping with the slime after Peter had jokingly suggested it.
*Venkman asking Oscar not to pee all over his Joe Willie Namath jersey.
I’m not trying to suggest the 2016 movie is on any similar level to the 1984 and 1989 films, but the humour isn’t all as highbrow as some people seem to be suggesting.
I don’t think citing a few examples of low-brow comedy refutes my point; there is a tremendous tonal shift in the comedy of these two films. Gone is the clever, witty sight gags and banter of the first film. Now it’s ■■■■, puke, dicks. I think the trailers have shown enough that we can agree with this.
Wat you don’t seem to get there are just as much of these gags in the other movies and while the trailer makes these punchlines, in the movie the scene could just as well continue. The original GB trailer does the same. While no one is saying the tone is absolutely the same, it’s not as far off as the doubters want us to believe.
I’m not usually crazy for vomit gags, but in the scope of things if what the reboot has presented so far is basically the general extent of what we’ll see through the film regarding the vomit gags (though the jury’s still out), it’s not something I’m worried about, it’s no more gross-out than when Ray got hit by the slime blowers, or Venkman got slimed at the Sedgewick.
So, we’re going rounds defending ■■■■ jokes now…
I never find ■■■■ jokes funny in movies because they never seem real enough. The reactions around them too heightened and the sound too fake. I mean, the one on the recorder might as well be known as the Wilhelm ■■■■.
Someone call Ben Burt in… we need to experiment. Perhaps some buckshot with a Walrus grunting?
I’m over the faux realism trend in Hollywood. And I’m over using humor to prove things about myself or others. High brow and low brow? We all take ourselves far too seriously.
Nobody’s said that they think it’s what the film needed, and that it’s a brilliant inclusion. Every person who has drawn a comparison is saying that the reboot isn’t the first to set precedence for it, even though it was on a much more subtle level.
As I said before, I don’t care for ■■■■ jokes… but if it’s a choice between just a ■■■■, and a puke joke, or a ■■■■ joke and a bowl movement joke… I’ll take the ■■■■ joke. :-?
I was surprised to find out Slimer actually ■■■■■■ in the movie!
0:43
I already knew the idea was for Slimer/onionhead ( so called because of the smell) to ■■■■ a lot more in the script, it was even storyboarded he bent over and let rip, but the large ■■■■ you hear in this scene is all that’s left from it.
No one is defending the ■■■■■■■ TV spot. Hell, I doubt it’s even in the movie. We were providing examples that Aykroyd/Ramis/Reitman weren’t above the thought of low-brow humor in the original GB.
There was also this bit of toilet humor:
Which isn’t in the movie? You guys are delusional if you seriously think the original film was as guttural as the current film. You’re going to tell me that a script reference call to slimer ■■■■■■■ (which isn’t even noticeable on film and isn’t even a joke) is akin to a joke where the setup is literally to make a girl listen to a recording of a ■■■■ and laugh at her? I’m not even saying a dick shot or a ■■■■ can’t be funny… but it’s about the setup to the joke; a key concept of comedy is setting expectations and surprising the audience. Big Lebowski when he frantically scribbles the notepad to see what Johhny Treehorn wrote… only to see a doodle of a guy with a dick. That’s a MUCH better joke! Broad City is one of the smartest comedies on TV (even starring two women) and they use vulgarity to deliver a joke… not vulgarity as the punch line.
And that’s the key, using vulgarity as a medium for delivering the joke, not vulgarity AS the joke. Peter’s joke about menstruation is NOT the punch line… the punch line comes NEXT “Back off, man, I’m a scientist.” The problem with the new film, and you KNOW it’s true because this is how Paul Feig directs all his comedies, is to use the vulgarity AS the punch line. She shoots Rowan in the dick and he recoils in pain. That’s the punch line, the dick shooting… not a followup to make us laugh by changing expectations. It’s lazy comedy.
“But you haven’t seen it!!1” True, but I’ll wager dollars to doughnuts, having seen Feig’s previous work, we know exactly what we’re in for; cheap laughs.
1 Like
You make some solid points there, I have to admit. I hope they’re just cutting out the punchlines for the trailers.
I think we have to agree to disagree at this point. You have trouble with trailercuts as you double down on in GB84 the sexjokes weren’t the punchlines. You are comparing a movie compiled of complete scenes full of jokes with a trailer with few jokes without a full scene.
Even the GB84 trailer used a sex joke as punchline to sell the audience with the make m hard scene, which you now know is just part of a scene. The dickshot is not the punchline. It’s part of a scene to anger him into making a mistake. I guarantee it.
1 Like
Difference being, if I watch the movie and I’m wrong, I’ll admit it was smarter comedy than I thought.
Difference being? What do you mean?
Suppose the film is released and the humor is every bit as low-brow as indicated by the trailers. Would you admit the comedy is a bust? Or at the very list, admit the humor is cheap, guttural jokes?