Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Thu August 25, 2016 12:35 am
E.H. Ruddock wrote:I want to see the interview scene again. I laughed so fucking hard at that scene
Red Mosquito
Ghostbusters (2016)
Page 39 of 47
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Thu August 25, 2016 12:59 am
What did they do now?
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Thu August 25, 2016 1:00 am
LoathedVermin72 wrote:People hacked her website and posted stolen nude photos, and images of her passport and driver's license.E.H. Ruddock wrote:What now?LoathedVermin72 wrote:This Leslie Jones shit has become straight-up heartbreaking. Fucking people.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Thu August 25, 2016 1:02 am
Jesus....LoathedVermin72 wrote:LoathedVermin72 wrote:People hacked her website and posted stolen nude photos, and images of her passport and driver's license.E.H. Ruddock wrote:What now?LoathedVermin72 wrote:This Leslie Jones shit has become straight-up heartbreaking. Fucking people.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Sat August 27, 2016 11:13 pm
I just finished listening to the Ghostbusters episode of the Geek History Lesson podcast. It was a lot of fun. Tons of stuff I never knew about the making of the original movie and the animated series.
I barely remember the series but man... listening to these stories brought back some of it... and what I do remember was bonkers. I think it was probably much better than I gave it credit for back in the day.
I barely remember the series but man... listening to these stories brought back some of it... and what I do remember was bonkers. I think it was probably much better than I gave it credit for back in the day.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 8:28 pm
Seems ill be watching this one tonight.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 8:36 pm
Oh yeah - I finally got around to watching this over the weekend.
It certainly wasn't great - not as bad as I'd expected though. Kate McKinnon's character was really annoying though
It certainly wasn't great - not as bad as I'd expected though. Kate McKinnon's character was really annoying though
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 8:45 pm
That's it--let's fight.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 8:47 pm
MMA vs. Capoeira!
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 9:20 pm
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Tue September 27, 2016 9:33 pm
Eddie Gordo was my 2nd favorite Tekken character.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 1:38 am
Horrendous. Gosh...what was that?? BORING.
So unfunny it hurts...the script and acting is beyond poor. The effects look so, so cheap...The ghosts were supposed to be scary? Pretty horrible cgi.
The scene with Thor dancing? They repeat that in the credits?
Im glad it bombed in the box office and there is not going to be a sequel, because really, it might be the worst movie i saw in a long time.
So unfunny it hurts...the script and acting is beyond poor. The effects look so, so cheap...The ghosts were supposed to be scary? Pretty horrible cgi.
The scene with Thor dancing? They repeat that in the credits?
Im glad it bombed in the box office and there is not going to be a sequel, because really, it might be the worst movie i saw in a long time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 2:02 pm
Glad you finally watched it.VinylGuy wrote:Horrendous. Gosh...what was that?? BORING.
So unfunny it hurts...the script and acting is beyond poor. The effects look so, so cheap...The ghosts were supposed to be scary? Pretty horrible cgi.
The scene with Thor dancing? They repeat that in the credits?
Im glad it bombed in the box office and there is not going to be a sequel, because really, it might be the worst movie i saw in a long time.
The script and the acting ARE beyond poor.
The ghosts were NOT supposed to be scary, no.
Yes, the showed an extended dance number during the credits.
It might be the worst movie YOU'VE SEEN in a long time.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 5:53 pm
Joey, they said the ghosts were going to be really scary, more than in the original. Feig said that.durdencommatyler wrote:Glad you finally watched it.VinylGuy wrote:Horrendous. Gosh...what was that?? BORING.
So unfunny it hurts...the script and acting is beyond poor. The effects look so, so cheap...The ghosts were supposed to be scary? Pretty horrible cgi.
The scene with Thor dancing? They repeat that in the credits?
Im glad it bombed in the box office and there is not going to be a sequel, because really, it might be the worst movie i saw in a long time.
The script and the acting ARE beyond poor.
The ghosts were NOT supposed to be scary, no.
Yes, the showed an extended dance number during the credits.
It might be the worst movie YOU'VE SEEN in a long time.
I dont understand what you like from a movie with a really poor script and a poor performance by the cast. Whats left?
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:02 pm
Why are you listening to Paul Feig?VinylGuy wrote:Joey, they said the ghosts were going to be really scary, more than in the original. Feig said that.durdencommatyler wrote:Glad you finally watched it.VinylGuy wrote:Horrendous. Gosh...what was that?? BORING.
So unfunny it hurts...the script and acting is beyond poor. The effects look so, so cheap...The ghosts were supposed to be scary? Pretty horrible cgi.
The scene with Thor dancing? They repeat that in the credits?
Im glad it bombed in the box office and there is not going to be a sequel, because really, it might be the worst movie i saw in a long time.
The script and the acting ARE beyond poor.
The ghosts were NOT supposed to be scary, no.
Yes, the showed an extended dance number during the credits.
It might be the worst movie YOU'VE SEEN in a long time.
I dont understand what you like from a movie with a really poor script and a poor performance by the cast. Whats left?
I guess because we disagree on those points, friend. The script is a uneven and the film is a tad long. It's far from a perfect film. The performances are FAR from poor (excepting the main villain guy, who is pretty awful). It's a fun popcorn flick with some big laughs and fun action sequences.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:07 pm
I listen to him, because...well its his movie. If he says the ghosts are going to be scary and then they are not, its a big fail.
The script is a mix between the old movie, a far fetched story and a few of really bad jokes from SNL.
And there was no acting at all...whtas the difference between Leslie Jones here or snl? Or Kirsten Wiig approach here or the skeleton twins? Its pretty much the same character.
The script is a mix between the old movie, a far fetched story and a few of really bad jokes from SNL.
And there was no acting at all...whtas the difference between Leslie Jones here or snl? Or Kirsten Wiig approach here or the skeleton twins? Its pretty much the same character.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:20 pm
Leslie Jones is absolutely doing Leslie Jones. I happen to find that funny, so I don't care. Wiig is making choices. If you find it similar to another character she's played, that's fine. I don't see why that's an automatic negative. She was good in Skeleton Twins. She's good in this. Plenty of actors play the same kind of character in multiple films. Big whoop. If it's good, if the choices are consistent, and the performance makes sense, I don't really care. The other two leads are really great. And Hemsworth is outstanding.
As far as Feig's comments, I don't care. If the movie was supposed to be scary, then it failed on that score. I didn't expect it to be scary. The original isn't scary, so I didn't think this one would be. I'm sorry Paul mislead you. I never saw/heard/read those comments. Maybe that would have made me feel differently. But I don't except CGI ghosts in a comedy reboot to be particularly frightening.
As far as Feig's comments, I don't care. If the movie was supposed to be scary, then it failed on that score. I didn't expect it to be scary. The original isn't scary, so I didn't think this one would be. I'm sorry Paul mislead you. I never saw/heard/read those comments. Maybe that would have made me feel differently. But I don't except CGI ghosts in a comedy reboot to be particularly frightening.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:28 pm
Oh. We have different views on this too...for me, he was just dull and boring and i actually felt bad for him during those dance scenes.durdencommatyler wrote:Leslie Jones is absolutely doing Leslie Jones. I happen to find that funny, so I don't care. Wiig is making choices. If you find it similar to another character she's played, that's fine. I don't see why that's an automatic negative. She was good in Skeleton Twins. She's good in this. Plenty of actors play the same kind of character in multiple films. Big whoop. If it's good, if the choices are consistent, and the performance makes sense, I don't really care. The other two leads are really great. And Hemsworth is outstanding.
As far as Feig's comments, I don't care. If the movie was supposed to be scary, then it failed on that score. I didn't expect it to be scary. The original isn't scary, so I didn't think this one would be. I'm sorry Paul mislead you. I never saw/heard/read those comments. Maybe that would have made me feel differently. But I don't except CGI ghosts in a comedy reboot to be particularly frightening.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:30 pm
To each their own, friend. He cracked my shit up.VinylGuy wrote:Oh. We have different views on this too...for me, he was just dull and boring and i actually felt bad for him during those dance scenes.durdencommatyler wrote:Leslie Jones is absolutely doing Leslie Jones. I happen to find that funny, so I don't care. Wiig is making choices. If you find it similar to another character she's played, that's fine. I don't see why that's an automatic negative. She was good in Skeleton Twins. She's good in this. Plenty of actors play the same kind of character in multiple films. Big whoop. If it's good, if the choices are consistent, and the performance makes sense, I don't really care. The other two leads are really great. And Hemsworth is outstanding.
As far as Feig's comments, I don't care. If the movie was supposed to be scary, then it failed on that score. I didn't expect it to be scary. The original isn't scary, so I didn't think this one would be. I'm sorry Paul mislead you. I never saw/heard/read those comments. Maybe that would have made me feel differently. But I don't except CGI ghosts in a comedy reboot to be particularly frightening.
Re: Ghostbusters (2016)
Posted: Wed September 28, 2016 6:33 pm
yeah, yeah i know from the start we are watching different movies. And thats fine.
Im just sad because i feel Feig lost a great opportunity. He made a very bland and safe movie with a interesting cast. And he didnt pushed that cast to make something good.
Im just sad because i feel Feig lost a great opportunity. He made a very bland and safe movie with a interesting cast. And he didnt pushed that cast to make something good.