Arch-MaesterPhilip Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 57 minutes ago, drawkcabi said: I'm not disputing it was a blow job, I just don't get how it was not dream. A dream about getting a blow job from a ghost, yes, definitely, but a dream nonetheless. They even had the harp dream music. I thought she was an angel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted July 21, 2016 Author Share Posted July 21, 2016 Quote -- I am not crazy about the new version of the theme song. It does sound like the test audiences actually (for once) helped this movie. I gather they moved the new version of the theme tune - which is shit but might have worked better if it had just been Missy Elliott and not fucking Fall Out Boy as well - into the middle of the picture and only aired a brief chunk of it, and restored the original Ray Parker version to both the opening and closing credits based on responses. They also moved a full song-and-dance routine with Hemsworth and the hypnotised cops from the film itself to the end credits, which worked a lot better (apparently Sony gritted their teeth over that one, as the sequence cost $1 million to shoot by itself). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felice Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 2 hours ago, Werthead said: They also moved a full song-and-dance routine with Hemsworth and the hypnotised cops from the film itself to the end credits, which worked a lot better Not that much better... they still had the setup for it without the payoff, which felt a bit mystifying until the credits confirmed what it was actually about. It didn't spoil the movie, though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 I haven't seen the film yet, but I think it's funny how most of the Youtube reviewers have completely different takeaways from the film. There doesn't seem to be a lot of agreement on what worked and what didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetyrPunkinhead Posted July 21, 2016 Share Posted July 21, 2016 6 hours ago, Simon Steele said: Well, not everyone agrees. I can see your point of view, but when I was nine I figured they were playing with the idea that most ghostly encounters are dream like. And they were trying to keep it PG and subtle. But overall, it seemed like it was a BJ to me. You're right. It was meant to be ghost sex. If you listen to the commentary on the original film you hear director Ivan Reitman talking about how it was a longer scene and it was cut down to make it innuendo for all the reasons you think. I think the full scene is even on the DVD in the deleted scenes section. This debate over whether Ray had ghost sex or dreamed it, along with the Red Letter Media review link, is the best thing about this reboot. I was really bored for most of this film. I agree with the RLM guy that Kate McKinnon was a surprising disappointment for me. The blending of the genres with comedy and sci-fi that defined the original are here in the reboot yet director Paul Feig took a different path with how to use those two genres. The humor is more vulgar than clever and the ghosts and effects are, ironically, more aimed at a younger audience and deliver more mindless, violent spectacle than fright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centrist Simon Steele Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 9 hours ago, drawkcabi said: I'm not disputing it was a blow job, I just don't get how it was not dream. A dream about getting a blow job from a ghost, yes, definitely, but a dream nonetheless. They even had the harp dream music. 1 Yeah I meant to say a real BJ--but I thought the "ripple" was playing with the idea of how ghosts messed with reality. I guess that's the problem with the montage--we have a movie about ghosts, where ghosts are real. It makes sense Ray gets a blowjob and we, the audience knows he got a blowjob, but the other Ghostbusters are like, "yeah, it happened when we're all sleeping? It was a dream. You never get lucky, nerd." That's the problem with the scene--despite the ripples, people can take it a number of ways. I'm not arguing your POV is invalid, of course, just that the scene itself is confusing because of how every ghost encounter is real, yet we suddenly have a dream sequence one? I get that this ghost is behaving differently, but it is problematic in tone and how it is introduced. If I saw the movie today for the first time, I'd say dream for sure. But my mind was much more abstract, strangely, when I was 9. A lot of people argue this point too. There is some confusion on it. On a different note--I just saw the movie. Loved it. Kate McKinnon WAS amazing. From her first lines, I had to watch her even when she wasn't talking, she was so funny. Chris Hemsworth's role was really funny in the "eye candy" role too. Perfectly done. This whole movie was great. I really enjoyed it, and honestly, given the original film's third act pacing trouble (the first 66 percent of the original is brilliant), I'd put this remake on par with the original, as the new one is consistently better paced throughout. The original was brilliant in the first act though. I don't know--I love the Ghostbusters, and I'm glad it is continuing in this way. This new iteration is perfect in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biter Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 Could someone rank the Ghostbusters (McCarthy, Wiig, McKinnon and Jones) by how funny you thought their characters were? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetyrPunkinhead Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 12 hours ago, Biter said: Could someone rank the Ghostbusters (McCarthy, Wiig, McKinnon and Jones) by how funny you thought their characters were? 1.Jones 2.McCarthy 3.Hemsworth 4.McKinnon & Wiig (Tied) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maester Llama Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 I ... I'm honestly not sure I can rank the performances / the humour, and I think that may be one of the movie's great strengths. They all contribute important comedic moments / approaches. Part of me wants to say that McKinnon is perhaps first among equals, with Jones close behind, but the post right above this one ranks things differently and I totally get that. It's a sign of a well-rounded movie, I think, when it's tough to come up with a general consensus about which performance is the best -- in this case there does seem to be some consensus that it's McKinnon, but clearly there are those who disagree. I've read a review or two that talk about Hemsworth and McKinnon stealing scenes, and I do get how that's the case, but it wasn't entirely my experience of the movie; they're attention-grabbing, for sure, and they're absolutely wonderful, but the other members of the ensemble are always there to catch the ball and throw it right back. There's no weak link. Each character gets some of my favourite jokes in the film -- Wyig [who gets some great stuff interacting with academia that I perhaps find more than usually funny because I've spent a lot of time in that space] and McCarthy have more arc-ish stuff going on with their characters so can be less purely comedic, but they too get great stuff. That's very interesting about test audiences being what got that dance sequence relocated and the hideous theme re-do minimised. That's unusually helpful of them. I love the dance thing, it's funny and I'm glad it got to stay in, but the credits is the right spot for it I think; I think it would've slowed things down too much in its original home. And yes, as Werthead says, it's very true that the redone theme -- while quite bad -- is in the movie a lot less than I expected, and does not befoul the big opening and closing theme moments. I'm glad a lot of people seem [I'm not really looking that hard, because the internet is even more sewer-ish than usual when it comes to this movie] to be coming round to it being a solid enough film with some good jokes and very good performances, an entertaining summer movie. Still a bit bemused by the wholly condemnatory responses that continue to manifest themselves. I absolutely understand not loving it -- some of its flaws are not small -- but I don't get how somebody can reasonably come to the conclusion that it's a flat out shitty movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centrist Simon Steele Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 20 hours ago, Biter said: Could someone rank the Ghostbusters (McCarthy, Wiig, McKinnon and Jones) by how funny you thought their characters were? 1. McKinnon 2. The rest And I'm a huge Wiig fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess who's back Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 wow, you people really like this pile of shit? This it the equivalent of current Sandler movies. edit: Even better, seems like there are some of you here who constantly shit on GoT and love this movie? LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drawkcabi Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 2 hours ago, Guess who's back said: wow, you people really like this pile of shit? This it the equivalent of current Sandler movies. edit: Even better, seems like there are some of you here who constantly shit on GoT and love this movie? LMAO Dude, it's fine to think this movie is a pile of shit, or have seen it and know it is, and to say that, but that's really uncool to crap on other people's opinions. From all the reviews you can take that this movie is very polarizing, enough to believe it's never going to be one of those movies that everyone across board believes is terrible, the people who like it number almost as much or maybe more than the people who don't. Enough to see that whatever you feel about the movie there's no call to deride others that see it as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaldanya Posted July 26, 2016 Share Posted July 26, 2016 I loved both of the original Ghostbusters movie (yes even the second one). The first one is still in standard rotation in my house when I'm watching movies before bed. So when I say love, I really mean it. I adored the reboot. I thought it was funny, clever and just a riot. If I could have seen it again on the same day, I would have. I felt pure joy when the four of them switched on their proton packs at the same time. I was moved with the final scene of NY paying it's respects to the Ghostbusters. I like the beats in the film that harked back to the original without being too cloying or in your face. It was great to have a movie like this with four female leads. As a woman I don't get a movie like this often (if at all...) and I'm fully willing to admit that may have coloured my perceptions a little but I'm OK with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawron Posted August 3, 2016 Share Posted August 3, 2016 It was great. I laughed throughout the movie. Just as good as the old one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 I watched it, and then watched the original again because I wanted to compare the two (and I hadn't seen the original in ages). I think I enjoyed the 2016 movie more than the 1984 movie, but they were both pretty good. The best cast stuff out of both is Ray interacting with anybody else, but the cast in the newer movie was more fun as a group (and yeah, Venkman's Pick-Up-Artist schtick is just cringe-worthy throughout the whole 1984 film). @Drawcakbi I think the film's reputation will go up and settle as "okay start to a new series" over time, especially once we get a sequel that strikes out into original ground (and which will compare positively with the original Ghostbusters 2, not that that's a hard bar to clear). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drawkcabi Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 50 minutes ago, Electric Bass said: @Drawcakbi I think the film's reputation will go up and settle as "okay start to a new series" over time, especially once we get a sequel that strikes out into original ground (and which will compare positively with the original Ghostbusters 2, not that that's a hard bar to clear). I still don't want to pay money to see this in the theater but I'm going to watch it when it comes out on DVD. From all the reviews I've seen/read I'm expecting a pretty mediocre film, not all that great but not terrible. But, we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 Scientist Man Analyzes Ghostbusters (2016) Redlettermedia's new take on all the controversy surrounding this movie. It's pretty hilarious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drawkcabi Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 3 hours ago, Veltigar said: Scientist Man Analyzes Ghostbusters (2016) Redlettermedia's new take on all the controversy surrounding this movie. It's pretty hilarious Yeah I loved that! But I think Nostalgia Critic has outdone himself, I think this is the best video he's ever done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel4s-JonSnow Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 4 hours ago, Veltigar said: Scientist Man Analyzes Ghostbusters (2016) Redlettermedia's new take on all the controversy surrounding this movie. It's pretty hilarious yeah that was really great. There are so many ways in which this controversy about this movie make a very good case study for the state of society today, maybe we'll look back in 30 years and still be talking about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veltigar Posted August 4, 2016 Share Posted August 4, 2016 9 hours ago, drawkcabi said: But I think Nostalgia Critic has outdone himself, I think this is the best video he's ever done. I must admit, I don't like the NC's style. I watched the whole thing and it still does nothing for me 8 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said: yeah that was really great. There are so many ways in which this controversy about this movie make a very good case study for the state of society today, maybe we'll look back in 30 years and still be talking about this. As far as I can tell, this movie doesn't deserve to be talked about now, let alone in 30 years time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.