Look, people thought Heath was going to completely ruin The Dark Knight. Let's just sit back and give it a chance first before we knock it. Could be horrible. Could be ok. For us 30 somethings, it will never be close to the original Ghostbusters. But hey, to me, Jurassic World didn't hold a candle to Jurassic Park, but apparently millions of Americans liked it enough to make it one of the biggest hits this year. Why? Lots of millenials who weren't around when Jurassic Park came out went to see it because Jurassic World is their Jurassic Park.

Same with Ghostbusters, This will be their Ghostbusters, and I'm sure they'll make it a success, regardless of what us old curmudgeons think about it.

7/16/2015 10:05:00 AM

Quote :

"Except that nobody is talking about whether this movie is going to make money (except for you, I guess). Just because it has the ghostbuster name attached to it means its going to probably do well...then you have the dolts that watch whatever crapy McCarthy is in. You mention "culturally equivalent" and "wattage", but they aren't the same thing. Murray was a great actor/comedian back then (and of course, still is), while McCarthy is good at her fat girl/eccentric-schtick...and that's it. I love Wiig and McKinnon (although don't know how McKinnon will fare in a big movie). But Jones is horrible and I'm sure she can ruin a movie. McCarthy also has her moments in movies where she's a supporting actress, but watching her for a whole film is torture."

the quote compared Murray & Akroyd to Wiig & McCarthy, but for whatever reason (to just attack an argument that nobody is making), people are reading that as "Melissa McCarthy is as funny or better than Bill Murray was in 1984 or is now" when nobody is making that claim

[Edited on July 16, 2015 at 10:07 AM. Reason : .]

7/16/2015 10:06:23 AM

Jurassic World was a continuation of the story.

Casting Ledger as the Joker was the proper casting choice because I'm sure his audition was great, but they went in there with the goal of casting the best actor.

For this movie, they started with a gimmick 'what if the ghostbusters were all female' and cast around that. That makes me skeptical. This is most likely going to be nothing but a rehash of the original.

7/16/2015 10:11:18 AM

^But isn't that what they do with every movie? "Here's an idea that I have...lets find an actor/actress that best meets my criteria for that idea."

This idea was an all female crew. Gimmick or not, that was the idea. They've cast the best actresses they see fit to fill those roles. As much as I hate Sara Silverman, I bet she would have made a better fit for this team than some of those picked - straight faced, sarcastic, dry delivery, similar to Murray's.

7/16/2015 10:15:13 AM

Here's my opinions:

McCarthy plays the same character in everything I've seen in her in, and is just unfunny in general (granted, i haven't seen her in movies except for bridesmais, because I really don't like her and can't imagine watching a movie where she plays the main character).
Jones plays the same character in everything I've seen her in (which granted, is just SNL skits), and is unfunny and a pretty horrible actress.)
Bill Murray is hilarious and a legend.
I never liked Dan Akroyd.
Wiig and McKinnon are pretty hilarious in the stuff I've seen them in.

If I had to guess, any movie that has McCarthy and Jones as lead characters is going to be pretty bad.

7/16/2015 10:18:35 AM

Quote :

"Look, people thought Heath was going to completely ruin The Dark Knight."

While I recognize I was in the minority...I didn't think that. While he hadn't been in the best movies before that, he was a pretty good actor and had actually done serious roles before (unlike McCarthy).

To be fair, this is probably a role McCarthy should do well in...supporting role like Bridesmaids. I personally think she's worn out her welcome after all of the starring roles she's been in. Her schtick is used up, IMO of course. I have no desire to see a movie with her or Jones in it.

7/16/2015 10:51:59 AM

Quote :

"But isn't that what they do with every movie?"

Yes, but this shows why Hollywood sucks.

"We need a new idea. I have one, let's completely retell the same story we told just 6 years ago in Spiderman, we'll just replace Tobey Maguire!"

Why not tell a completely new story that doesn't hold down these actresses by making them try to live up to something they can't possibly do due to nostalgia?

[Edited on July 16, 2015 at 11:00 AM. Reason : /]

7/16/2015 10:55:10 AM

After all the buzz around Bridesmaids I watched it. And really didn't think much of it. I probably built it up too much in my head after everything I had heard about it, but to me it was a let down. If I was stuck watching it again I wouldn't howl and moan about it, but it's not something I'd watch again by choice.

Wiig is funny, but only in small doses.

7/16/2015 1:05:56 PM

Quote :

"Melissa McCarthy plays the exact same character in everything I've seen her in."

You (and a bunch of other folks in this thread) obviously never watched Gilmore Girls. There's more to McCarthy than slapstick.

7/16/2015 11:36:36 PM

She was a fat chef at a bed and breakfast in a Dawson's Creek wannabe show. Can't believe you brought up Gilmore Girls (I watched the shit out of that show bc I had a crush on the mom and the daughter). She's gotta be your sister.

[Edited on July 16, 2015 at 11:48 PM. Reason : .]

7/16/2015 11:47:53 PM

Quote :

"Carthy plays the same character in everything I've seen in her in...granted, i haven't seen her in movies except for bridesmais Jones plays the same character in everything I've seen her in (which granted, is just SNL skits)"

Quote :

"(I watched the shit out of that show bc I have a wife/girlfriend"

ftfy, i hope.

7/17/2015 12:00:53 AM

says the guy who regularly links to gossip sites

7/17/2015 12:18:59 AM

Quote :

"She was a fat chef at a bed and breakfast in a Dawson's Creek wannabe show. Can't believe you brought up Gilmore Girls (I watched the shit out of that show bc I had a crush on the mom and the daughter)."

Gilmore Girls and Dawson's Creek have absolutely nothing in common beyond being set in small towns. Unless I forgot a Dawson's Creek episode that's a Belle & Sebastian reference-laden tribute to They Shoot Horses, Don't They?

7/17/2015 12:24:26 AM

^^

Quote :

"Today's gossip is tomorrow's news"

7/17/2015 8:50:51 AM

^^ All of those shows recycle the same issues/problems and have teenagers that talk like 50 year old literary scholars.

7/17/2015 9:35:50 AM

You're wrong. Gilmore Girls talked like literary scholars. Dawson talked like a 50 year old film critic/crybaby.

7/17/2015 9:36:42 AM

Quote :

"ftfy, i hope. "

I have/had an older women fetish. Lauralei (or however you spell that weird name) Gilmore was a big crush of mine growing up. Her daughter got hotter as she got older as well. It really wasn't a bad show either.

7/17/2015 9:37:08 AM

Quote :

"obviously never watched Gilmore Girls"

eh, you're right about that. i caught a few clips a few times and wanted to strangle the characters. i think the clip below is pretty accurate... i did borrow St. Vincent recently and will be watching it. I heard that McCarthy plays more of a "normal" character in that, we'll see.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LuE8W7p2jQ

7/17/2015 10:08:05 AM

not to mention the obvious "Mike and Molly" option. I don't understand the hate, but I've only seen like 1 of her movies (the one with Sandra Bullock where they are cops) and I thought that was fine. Perhaps her schtick just isn't old with me yet.

I just hate reboots in general, that's the only reason I'm a bit leery.

7/17/2015 10:39:04 AM

Quote :

"She was a fat chef at a bed and breakfast in a Dawson's Creek wannabe show. Can't believe you brought up Gilmore Girls (I watched the shit out of that show bc I had a crush on the mom and the daughter). She's gotta be your sister."

Vinylbandit is Jenny McCarthy?

Melissa McCarthy's shtick always struck me as a less funny Chris Farley.

7/17/2015 11:56:18 AM

I thought this was a disgrace

7/17/2015 12:12:50 PM

It really looks like cheap cosplay

[Edited on August 2, 2015 at 3:55 PM. Reason : 1]

8/2/2015 3:53:56 PM

so?

outside of the fact that you're shitting on a genuinely great photo/moment, for all that we know, there could be an entire joke and/or storyline about the way their suits look

8/2/2015 8:25:02 PM

I'm not shitting on the movie.

Look, I hate the PotC movies, but I think Depp going to hospitals is great, so I'm not trying to take away any of the patient's experience. However, this is one of the first decent pictures of them in their costumes with equipment, and it looks shitty.

8/2/2015 8:34:23 PM

you also have no idea how all of that will look on the screen

8/2/2015 8:43:51 PM

I remember reading somewhere that they were going for a more "homebrew" look with the equipment this time.

8/2/2015 8:57:16 PM

Here's a fun fact:

The outfits in the original GB movies (which are noticeably different in 1 vs. 2, btw) also look shitty. Because they are.

THEY'RE SCIENTISTS WHO MADE UNIFORMS.

8/6/2015 1:10:40 AM

Did this movie give that guy cancer?

8/6/2015 1:30:32 PM

some serious white knighting ITT

8/6/2015 3:23:38 PM

I prefer to call it Dark Knighting, because Heath Ledger is the ultimate example of why people should shut the fuck up until they see the movie.

8/7/2015 12:51:05 AM

Two totally different scenarios.

8/7/2015 9:42:25 AM

how do you figure?

8/7/2015 10:10:48 AM

Heath Ledger as the Joker was a casting choice.
This is a reboot with a deliberate change in mind (let's cast 4 women instead of men!)

8/7/2015 10:14:09 AM

which is also a casting choice

what is wrong with casting women instead of men?

8/7/2015 10:17:16 AM

No, this is a gimmick and the casting choices were made to reflect that.

Look at casting Idris Elba in Thor or similiar 'omg an X actor is playing a character who is Y in the comics'. I have no issues with those casting decisions because they probably decided 'Hey, lets get the best actor who auditions' and they cast based on that.

This movie didn't need to be remade. They decided to remake it based on a gimmick. And now people are supposed to avoid calling them out on the gimmick? I don't see anything wrong with saying 'the all female ghostbuster movie' because that's the idea they had in mind when they started this.

8/7/2015 10:34:54 AM

two things:

1) so you would be against a new Ghostbusters regardless of the sex of the actors playing it?

and

2) why is the fact that women are playing the leads in a movie a gimmick?

8/7/2015 10:45:02 AM

oops wrong thread

[Edited on August 7, 2015 at 10:49 AM. Reason : w]

8/7/2015 10:48:48 AM

1. Yes, it's an IP that really didn't need to be remade. If it was a continuation of the story then I would still be hesitant, but I would be a little more optimistic.

2. Because it's obviously a gimmick. M Night's movies all have the same gimmick 'lets have a big twist in the end'. Rereleasing a movie in 3D is a gimmick.

8/7/2015 10:52:12 AM

saying something is a gimmick implies that it shouldn't be taken seriously

if that's your argument, then you're basically saying the only way to take this movie seriously would be if they hired men as leads as opposed to women

and that's without even getting into how worked up people are getting over a piece of absolute fiction

8/7/2015 11:00:06 AM

Yeah, that's not what I'm saying at all.

"Hey, you know that movie you like? Well, what if we redid it, but changed the entire leading cast to women"

is totally different from either leaving the IP alone, continuing the story but with new characters (hell, they can even be females, I don't care)

I like Star Trek. DS9 is my favorite of the series, and I don't refer to it 'oh, the one with the black guy as Captain' or (despite how shitty it was) Voyager as 'oh, the one with the female as Captain'. Now if they decided to just remake TOS but have Kirk played by a woman, then that's a gimmick. I don't see what's so hard for you to understand about this.

8/7/2015 11:22:29 AM

they aren't playing the roles of the 4 from the original....

[Edited on August 7, 2015 at 11:34 AM. Reason : .]

8/7/2015 11:29:01 AM

In name, no. However, I'd put serious money that they're playing the exact same 4 archetypes as the original cast.

8/7/2015 11:31:24 AM

your Kirk example doesn't work since they aren't playing the same characters

Quote :

"is totally different from either leaving the IP alone, continuing the story but with new characters (hell, they can even be females, I don't care)"

this could be the case. NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT THE PLOT OF THE MOVIE.

8/7/2015 11:34:17 AM

It's not the case, they've already mentioned that this is not in the same universe as the original.

8/7/2015 11:36:01 AM

I really don't understand how Melissa McCarthy has a career

terrible

8/7/2015 11:38:48 AM

^^ fine, it's a reboot

that doesn't take anything away from the ridiculousness of people whining because they cast 4 women as leads

8/7/2015 11:49:21 AM

It's a shitty gimmick for a reboot that didn't need to be made.

8/7/2015 12:12:11 PM

^^

4 women wouldn't bother me. the women they cast however are either annoying, gimmicky, or just plain terrible. judging by the casting and the props we have seen pictures of so far, this movie so far looks less like a reboot and more like a parody. of course we could all totally be wrong and it might blow the original out of the water... but based on the information we do have, it looks like complete crap.

[Edited on August 7, 2015 at 1:14 PM. Reason : ]

8/7/2015 1:14:03 PM

is Lorne Michaels producing it?

8/7/2015 5:33:54 PM

^^ I really don't give a shit what anyone thinks of the other three, but Kate McKinnon is a goddamn genius and is in no way gimmicky, annoying, or terrible.

8/8/2015 12:30:36 AM