It's probably just because they're all females. If it was all guys people would probably say "just another shitty remake."Mecca wrote:It looks bad. I'm surprised to see people react positively to it on social media.
Ghostbusters (2016)
- RussellManiac12
- Broken Tamborine
- Posts: 428
- Joined: Fri January 11, 2013 8:58 pm
- Location: Vancouver, WA
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
- Mecca
- slower than 82% of US
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Wed December 19, 2012 7:17 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
There's definitely some tinge of that, but coupled with "you don't like this because it's all women." Is it really so hard for people to look at that trailer and not realize it looks just like a trailer for Pixels?RussellManiac12 wrote:It's probably just because they're all females. If it was all guys people would probably say "just another shitty remake."Mecca wrote:It looks bad. I'm surprised to see people react positively to it on social media.
At least Kate McKinnon is getting a chance to feature besides just SNL?
- dimejinky99
- what on earth am I talking about
- Posts: 39789
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
There is a huge amount of overbearing meninism for this, both on RM and elsewhere online..
Star Wars went through the same trauma when the trailers dropped and the lead was a girl and shock horror a black guy..if it was the original team standing there you guys would be all over this.
you'll get over it. I hope so anyways.
Star Wars went through the same trauma when the trailers dropped and the lead was a girl and shock horror a black guy..if it was the original team standing there you guys would be all over this.
you'll get over it. I hope so anyways.
Calibrate your enthusiasm
- Rangi Guy
- Mind Your Tanners
- Posts: 9429
- Joined: Fri March 22, 2013 7:20 pm
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/MistorKitty
- Location: 41.1716° S, 174.8248° E
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
It's got nothing to do with the cast - it just to do with the forced humour and how much this could be one of Adam Sandler's latest filmsdimejinky99 wrote:There is a huge amount of overbearing meninism for this, both on RM and elsewhere online..
Star Wars went through the same trauma when the trailers dropped and the lead was a girl and shock horror a black guy..if it was the original team standing there you guys would be all over this.
you'll get over it. I hope so anyways.
"I really enjoy sandwiches but the other guys are so good at making sandwiches that I don't make them. Now I make sandwiches."
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Is it your dashing good looks that caused you to slack off on the books and make yourself retarded?dimejinky99 wrote:There is a huge amount of overbearing meninism for this, both on RM and elsewhere online..
Star Wars went through the same trauma when the trailers dropped and the lead was a girl and shock horror a black guy..if it was the original team standing there you guys would be all over this.
you'll get over it. I hope so anyways.
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I like McCarthy a lot. She brings a lot of humanity to her roles, even the silly ones. Can't stand Wiig though. She's just corny. I dunno about the other two.E.H. Ruddock wrote:I liked that movie "Spy" with her in it but that was more because Jason Statham was hilarious.lennytheweedwhacker wrote:i think verb would literally spit on herE.H. Ruddock wrote:do you think verb likes mccarthy?lennytheweedwhacker wrote:i'm not even watching the trailer...i like mckinnon, hate jones, and think mccarthy and wiig are vastly overratedMecca wrote:It looks bad. I'm surprised to see people react positively to it on social media.
i thought she was really good in st. vincent...i'd like to see her go beyond the loud, fat shtick more
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- Mecca
- slower than 82% of US
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Wed December 19, 2012 7:17 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I'd say it's been pretty tame here on RM. the movie looks bad, dime.dimejinky99 wrote:There is a huge amount of overbearing meninism for this, both on RM and elsewhere online..
Star Wars went through the same trauma when the trailers dropped and the lead was a girl and shock horror a black guy..if it was the original team standing there you guys would be all over this.
you'll get over it. I hope so anyways.
- tragabigzanda
- Production Police
- Posts: 51634
- Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.
Last edited by tragabigzanda on Sun January 11, 2026 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 84848
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I'll definitely give it a fair shot. The trailer was weird but not because of the cast. These ladies look like they can definitely handle themselves.
Still optimistic. And will still see this in theaters.
Still optimistic. And will still see this in theaters.
- dimejinky99
- what on earth am I talking about
- Posts: 39789
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 12:35 am
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Ok..look at it this way..imagine the possibility that the got the surviving members of the original crew back, and for whatever reasons, and probably given theyre all near to being ghosts themselves, it didnt work..
then compare that to what they chose to do, which is give it new life and fuck yeah it's about time we see a film in this genre lead by females instead of males,(and that's probably why it won't set the box-office on fire)
which would you choose?
then compare that to what they chose to do, which is give it new life and fuck yeah it's about time we see a film in this genre lead by females instead of males,(and that's probably why it won't set the box-office on fire)
which would you choose?
Calibrate your enthusiasm
- tragabigzanda
- Production Police
- Posts: 51634
- Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.
Last edited by tragabigzanda on Sun January 11, 2026 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Jorge
- NYUCK NYUCK NYUCK
- Posts: 36490
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:35 pm
- Location: Buenos Aires
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying "women shouldn't front blockbusters!". Well some people probably are, but that's irrelevant.
I'm not even against the idea of an all-women Ghostbusters reboot.
This one just... seems kinda... not great?! Based on this one trailer and the creative pedigree.
I'm not even against the idea of an all-women Ghostbusters reboot.
This one just... seems kinda... not great?! Based on this one trailer and the creative pedigree.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
- epilogue
- We All We Got, We All We Need
- Posts: 84848
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:33 pm
- Location: Ghorman
- Contact:
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I don't think anyone around here is saying that. You're right. But the internet... ? Oh my how the internet is saying exactly that!theplatypus wrote:Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying "women shouldn't front blockbusters!". Well some people probably are, but that's irrelevant.
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
So my choice is between a hypothetically bad movie starring the old cast or a safe and needless remake with the old cast replaced with women (because fuck yeah?)? Why are these my only choices? Why would I pick one? How about a good movie with the old cast? What about a movie with female characters who aren't forced into pale imitations of male ones? They are just being set up to fail. How are women benefited by this? How is a lockstep remake "giving it new life" and not soulless pandering?dimejinky99 wrote:Ok..look at it this way..imagine the possibility that the got the surviving members of the original crew back, and for whatever reasons, and probably given theyre all near to being ghosts themselves, it didnt work..
then compare that to what they chose to do, which is give it new life and fuck yeah it's about time we see a film in this genre lead by females instead of males,(and that's probably why it won't set the box-office on fire)
which would you choose?
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
What percentage of the internet would you put it at?durdencommatyler wrote:I don't think anyone around here is saying that. You're right. But the internet... ? Oh my how the internet is saying exactly that!theplatypus wrote:Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying "women shouldn't front blockbusters!". Well some people probably are, but that's irrelevant.
RM's resident disinformation expert.
- Strat
- Waiting for HVAC Repairman
- Posts: 35407
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:48 pm
- Location: Twin City Kisses
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
star wars
- tragabigzanda
- Production Police
- Posts: 51634
- Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Steve Albini wrote:Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.
Last edited by tragabigzanda on Sun January 11, 2026 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- spike
- The Master
- Posts: 35446
- Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 4:18 am
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
You've sure gleaned an amazing amount from a two minute trailer. Do you even bother seeing movies, having this amazing ability at your disposal?BurtReynolds wrote:So my choice is between a hypothetically bad movie starring the old cast or a safe and needless remake with the old cast replaced with women (because fuck yeah?)? Why are these my only choices? Why would I pick one? How about a good movie with the old cast? What about a movie with female characters who aren't forced into pale imitations of male ones? They are just being set up to fail. How are women benefited by this? How is a lockstep remake "giving it new life" and not soulless pandering?dimejinky99 wrote:Ok..look at it this way..imagine the possibility that the got the surviving members of the original crew back, and for whatever reasons, and probably given theyre all near to being ghosts themselves, it didnt work..
then compare that to what they chose to do, which is give it new life and fuck yeah it's about time we see a film in this genre lead by females instead of males,(and that's probably why it won't set the box-office on fire)
which would you choose?
- Mecca
- slower than 82% of US
- Posts: 8516
- Joined: Wed December 19, 2012 7:17 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
I think the only sentiment even close to it is "do we have to prop up something that looks like it will be bad just because of the cast?"durdencommatyler wrote:I don't think anyone around here is saying that. You're right. But the internet... ? Oh my how the internet is saying exactly that!theplatypus wrote:Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying "women shouldn't front blockbusters!". Well some people probably are, but that's irrelevant.
- BurtReynolds
- An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
- Posts: 45827
- Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
- Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
That's probably the worst post you've ever made. Frankly, I'm ashamed of you.spike wrote:You've sure gleaned an amazing amount from a two minute trailer. Do you even bother seeing movies, having this amazing ability at your disposal?BurtReynolds wrote:So my choice is between a hypothetically bad movie starring the old cast or a safe and needless remake with the old cast replaced with women (because fuck yeah?)? Why are these my only choices? Why would I pick one? How about a good movie with the old cast? What about a movie with female characters who aren't forced into pale imitations of male ones? They are just being set up to fail. How are women benefited by this? How is a lockstep remake "giving it new life" and not soulless pandering?dimejinky99 wrote:Ok..look at it this way..imagine the possibility that the got the surviving members of the original crew back, and for whatever reasons, and probably given theyre all near to being ghosts themselves, it didnt work..
then compare that to what they chose to do, which is give it new life and fuck yeah it's about time we see a film in this genre lead by females instead of males,(and that's probably why it won't set the box-office on fire)
which would you choose?
RM's resident disinformation expert.