BTW Slimer doesn’t ■■■■ in the ballroom, he growls/grunts at Peter after Peter said *“I bet you’ll never slime a guy with a positron collider, huh?!” *
BUT, we must be 100% certain this is what it is. We need to audio analyze it in software and compare it to other ■■■■ sounds. Maybe reenact it to see if it sounds natural enough to be real. Science depends on us for the clarification, and Paul Feig will thank us for deconstructing the sense of humor in his film compared to the original.
True, it didn’t make the film. I totally agree with Mr. Space ■■■■■ that it’s definitely more of a grunt in the final cut.
The point I was trying to get across is that Aykroyd, Ramis, and Reitman didn’t feel GB was above some crude humor in 84 (READ THE POSTS!). A ■■■■ joke in a short TV spot isn’t a make or break thing for me. The way the TV spot is cut, it feels like it might not even be part of the movie. It’s possible that spot was cut more for children’s programming. We’ll find out in a few weeks.
If the movie is nothing but ■■■■ jokes, then yeah… that won’t be impressive. Of course, GB16 is a different movie than the original. The comedy landscape has changed in 30 years. It’s not going to be the original-- it was developed for modern audiences. If you go in expecting the same humor than the original, that’s on you.
All of you haters will be much happier if you adjust your expectations. I’m not really sure why any of this stuff is surprising still.
The real question is whether they thought Ghostbusters II was above some crude humor.
On a different note, it’s too bad they had to cut this scene:
INT. PARKVIEW PSYCHIATRIC WARD - DAY (SAME TIME)
The Ghostbusters are sitting in the dayroom, a dingy lounge for patients
in the locked ward. There is a television set, a Ping-Pong table and a
few tables and chairs. Stantz is looking at the sky through the heavy
wire mesh covering the windows.
STANTZ
This is it. boys. It's starting. Shit-storm
2000.
Venkman is doing occupational therapy, weaving on a little hand-loom.
VENKMAN
It better not start yet. I'm trying to
finish my potholder before lunch.
WINSTON
You think all those predictions about the
world coming to an end in the 1990s are true?
A PATIENT at the next table joins the discussion.
PATIENT
(with certainty)
1997. My dog told me.
VENKMAN
What kind of dog?
PATIENT
Labrador.
VENKMAN
(shakes his head)
Habitual liars. They can't help it. It's
in the breed.
Why would I not? I already stated a few times the humor seemed to be the most worrying part of the reboot. I’m willing to give the movie a fair chance though and know a bit how trailers work.
Look, we are both looking for different things, obviously. You are against the reboot and will focus on any fault, while I will look to any positive thing, but once the movie has ended I can and will give my honest and open opinion of it. Which might surprise you, but I’m not condemning a movie while focussing on every bad thing and ignoring the good, or claiming the original did not have the same broad spectrum of humor, because it did have slapstick, innuendo, etc. But we have gone through thus already. Agree to disagree.
Don’t make it personal and assume just because I’m perfectly OK with a reboot I must like the end result at all costs. I could have said the opposite to you but never did.
Hehe, yeah it’s silly to deep analyze a possible ■■■■ scene, but have you tried growling or grunting with an completely open mouth while making involuntary sounds because you are being shocked?
Usually when I growl or grunt it’s halfway through a number 2. It never actually occurred to me that Slimer could be ■■■■■■■ in the movie. I’d always assumed he was growling. With a diet like Slimer’s the poor spud has got to be constipated about 24/7.
That’s as believable as telling me that women don’t ■■■■!
No, that’s not true. I WANT this movie to succeed. If this film tanks it sends Sony a message that Ghostbusters, as a property, is a lost cause. It would dash any hopes for future films for a long time. The problem is… I’m trying to be objective and the development of this film is a trainwreck. We’re riding the Ghostbusters train and the tracks on the upcoming bridge are missing. I’m watching as the film careens close to its inevitable destruction while people around me say “We haven’t even hit the missing tracks yet, how do you know everything won’t be fine?”
Maybe the film will be ok… but damn if there aren’t enough clues suggesting a failure of epic proportions; the director didn’t even WANT to make this film, he wanted to make a separate comedy starring women and just adapted it to Ghostbusters. The Sony leaks lay out an absolute MESS of production behind the scenes of this film. This film is essentially just a remake of the first film. They were scrambling to cut scenes from this film as soon as a month before release (the dance number). The trailer was poorly received and the trailers indicate this film will be a complete tonal shift from the originals. The film’s debut schedule is bookended between some MASSIVE movie properties (Independence Day, Ice Age, Star Trek, Bourne, Suicide Squad)… if this film isn’t stand-out amazing with massive weekend ticket sales, there’s a very good chance this film is lost among a bunch of larger summer blockbusters.
The final tell will be a week before release; if Sony implements a review embargo, it will be a strong indication they have no faith in this film.
Like I said, I WANT Ghostbusters to succeed, I WANT to watch a trailer and get excited for the film… but all indicators are telling me this is going to be a disaster. I haven’t seen it, but then again I haven’t been in a train wreck either… but when I see missing track ahead, I’m pretty sure I know what I’m in for.
I don’t think even Sony is that dense. Maybe they are - they certainly don’t seem like the brightest stars in the sky. If their takeaway from a critical and/or box-office failure is that Ghostbusters isn’t a profitable brand, they need to sell the property to a company with some common sense. They’ve mishandled this movie every step of the way and have proven they don’t understand its value or what made it a classic in the first place. If anything, the public outcry against this trash is an indication that people are very fond of the original property. I don’t have stats, but I imagine all of the memorabilia relating to the first two movies is selling well enough to confirm the public’s affection for the “real” Ghostbusters. The bottom line is - any further film adaptations need to show respect for the franchise, and this movie clearly missed the mark.
I apoligize in advance if I mistook your meaning, but if you are not against a reboot, then why did you write this in 2015 in ‘Somber, constructive and kinder ways to look at the reboot’ topic?
Because it’s been obvious since then? And… I was right, wasn’t I? They DID hit all the bullet points (Slimer, Stay Puft, Ecto-1, Traps, 100-foot end boss, theme song, cameos from the originals, firehouse…). The new movie isn’t really bringing anything new, just putting a little twist on a remake the original film. We can even look at my post in hindsight; everything the leaks revealed turned out to be true.
I still want the film to succeed, but damn if I wasn’t right about how the film would look.
Well, to be fair, saying they will incorporate cameos, slimer etc is not that much of a stretch.
I think the main factor here is you choose to interpretet the elements/bullet points that makes a Ghostbusters movie a negative one. For me it’s not unoriginal to use the packs, slimer, traps, a big bad and the ecto-1.
For me those are requirements to call it a Ghostbusters movie! I don’t think you can have a GB movie without packs, traps, a big bad, slimer etc and they gave a new element spin on each one as well. Well, maybe except slimer.
How dare he be a fake, and fake help all those women achieve fake stardom and fake hire so much women behind the scenes and promote fake female directors. Bad Feig!
Are you saying a director is not allowed to direct? Would you give your own job to your son if you were still able to do it and let him have the income? The guy has got to eat.
Feig was asked to direct because Sony knows he can do comedy and is a big name. Can you name a female director with the same skills which also was available in the allowed timeslot? It’s not as simple as you guys make it out to be. He did attract some female producers for the movie, just like his previous films.
On top of all that Feig has never done a special effects blockbuster like this and it’s a big chance for him to advance even further.
