Ghostbusters reboot cast announced

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by JD10367

So I was 16 when I saw the original "Ghostbusters" and loved it. In hindsight, rewatching it nowadays, it's an awful movie. Dumb plot, badly written, not much in it really funny. So, comparatively, the new "Ghostbusters" (which I finally saw today) doesn't fare too badly. It's also a pretty awful movie, with a dumb plot, bad writing, and not much in it really funny. It's 100% pointless (as in, there was no point for making this film at all). On the good side, the effects were decent, and Wiig and McCarthy and Leslie Jones were toned-down versions of themselves. Hemsworth was also entertaining as a "dumb blonde" making fun with the reversed stereotype. And Kate McKinnon was definitely the strong point. I agree with a writer who said they were almost too deferential to the original film, treating it like it was "The Godfather" or something (instead of the silly trivial summer comedy it was). They didn't need the gratuitous cameos, the reuse of the song, the reuse of the logo, the reuse of the Sta-Puft Marshmallow Man, the reuse of the little green gobliny ghost, the reuse of the fire station, the... well, you get the point. It's pretty much not a film I would even flip to if it were on television, that's how utterly pointless and forgettable it is.

Not sure how you can say the original was an "awful" movie, but whatever. You are definitely in the minority there.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

Not sure how you can say the original was an "awful" movie, but whatever. You are definitely in the minority there.

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

[Cheater5]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

For me it's Blues Brothers. I thought it was one of the funniest movies in the history of ever back in the day. About two years ago I got halfway through before cutting it off.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Cheater5

For me it's Blues Brothers. I thought it was one of the funniest movies in the history of ever back in the day. About two years ago I got halfway through before cutting it off.

Now you've gone and pissed me off.

Blues Brothers never gets old. Seen it a good 50+ times, still catch it at least twice a year or so. Not to mention playing musical scenes when the occasion strikes.

Top 5 comedy all time.

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Now you've gone and pissed me off.

Blues Brothers never gets old. Seen it a good 50+ times, still catch it at least twice a year or so. Not to mention playing musical scenes when the occasion strikes.

Top 5 comedy all time.

Agreed.

BB2000 on the other hand......

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by Cheater5

For me it's Blues Brothers. I thought it was one of the funniest movies in the history of ever back in the day. About two years ago I got halfway through before cutting it off.

Dumbest post of the year award. NTTAWTT...

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

Yes, and I still love it just fine. I don't get the hate for it at all. You give Spaceballs a pass, but not Ghostbusters. Mkay, each his own.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

Some movies don't age as well as others, for any number of reasons. Easy Rider comes immediately to mind. It doesn't mean that they weren't good movies.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

Not sure how you can say the original was an "awful" movie, but whatever. You are definitely in the minority there.

Originally Posted by JD10367

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

I can see both sides. A lot of the affection for the movie is about how cool the stars were as comic actors and a specific comedic sensibility the movie cultivated.

Its humor is very subjective, perhaps moreso than other movies.

Doesn't mean you're wrong for thinking it's a timeless classic
Doesn't mean you're wrong for thinking it's a relic of the era.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by JD10367

Have you watched it lately? Try it. It did not age well. Most stuff from that era doesn't (aside from the rarity like "Spaceballs"). Christopher Reeve's "Superman" is another film that I loved at the time and now I facepalm when watching it.

Wow. You think Spaceballs holds up but Ghostbusters doesn't?

No accounting for taste, I suppose.

Spaceballs was Mel Brooks at his worst. Had you gone with Young Frankenstein or Blazing Saddles, I'd at least understand your point. I'd disagree (Ghostbusters is still good), but I'd at least see where you're coming from.

But man, Spaceballs?

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Wow. You think Spaceballs holds up but Ghostbusters doesn't?

No accounting for taste, I suppose.

Spaceballs was Mel Brooks at his worst. Had you gone with Young Frankenstein or Blazing Saddles, I'd at least understand your point. I'd disagree (Ghostbusters is still good), but I'd at least see where you're coming from.

But man, Spaceballs?

I've always had a soft spot for Robin Hood Men in Tights.

[JD10367]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Wow. You think Spaceballs holds up but Ghostbusters doesn't?

No accounting for taste, I suppose.

Spaceballs was Mel Brooks at his worst. Had you gone with Young Frankenstein or Blazing Saddles, I'd at least understand your point. I'd disagree (Ghostbusters is still good), but I'd at least see where you're coming from.

But man, Spaceballs?

I was aiming for "same era". "Ghostbusters" was 1984, "Spaceballs" was 1987. "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" were a) 1974 and b) two of the greatest comedies ever made. I said "Spaceballs" holds up better, I didn't say it was the best Mel Brooks film.

[jjjayb]

Does anyone else think they inflated the "anti-woman" narrative to get extra publicity knowing it was a turd?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

Does anyone else think they inflated the "anti-woman" narrative to get extra publicity knowing it was a turd?

Sony is not that smart

[Red Brooklyn]

Originally Posted by jjjayb

Does anyone else think they inflated the "anti-woman" narrative to get extra publicity knowing it was a turd?

No