Jump to content
The King of Hate Forums
DieStimme

This Is How You Don't Produce: Ghostbusters (2016)

Recommended Posts

It is time for a new miniseries. I am sorry that I have not found a better title for this, but I guess it is a catchy phrase. Basically I want to discuss about fails in movie productions.

 

When a new Ghostbusters movie was announced for 2016, after three decades since the first movie came out, people had mixed feelings. Then came the huge surprise: the cast will be all-new (as expected since last year Harold Ramis died - RIP), but also all female. All four Ghostbusters will be women, played by actresses known from comedies.

It had to be Hollywood's bold move to make the gender-swap with Ghostbusters to make me fully agree with Phil on one topic. Yet another movie classic or beloved series that has been recycled into a new movie where everybody was asking why. Was there a new movie needed? Was there something to tell the two original movies did not tell us?

While some of the relaunches like Star Trek or the James Bond movies since Daniel Craig got some fresh blood and were widely critically accepted, others failed miserably. Even so, some beloved series received the Michael Bay treatment, such as Transformers and (to lesser extent) the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Remakes that may have cool special effects, but lack of soul, humor and witty dialogue. Elements the two original Ghostbusters had.

 

Honestly, I do not much about the actresses. Okay Melissa McCarthy a bit. I was like "Molly from Mike and Molly?" But it wouldn't have changed much. It reminded me on the short-living Extreme Ghostbusters where the new team had to be politically correct as possible (a girl, a handicapped, a hispanic and a black character), now we get four women doing the ghost hunt job.

 

Much about what I thought had Phil also said in his ATK (I guess) but I wouldn't have said it that way, also I am not ranting. What worries me about this movie is the rat tail is drags with it. People will use Ghostbusters 2016 to push an agenda:

If the movie bombs --> "you fans hate women, you do not want women to succeed" basic feminism stuff

If the movie will become a hit --> "the major factor of the succees was that we had four women as main cast and not men"

No matter the outcome, the bold move will be used by feminists to push their agenda.

 

Sorry, but seriously ... who green-lights such a stupid idea of a movie? I mean it's the same miracle why Adam Sandler gets 70 million dollars to make Jack & Jill, yet it blows my mind.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much about what I thought had Phil also said in his ATK (I guess) but I wouldn't have said it that way, also I am not ranting. What worries me about this movie is the rat tail is drags with it. People will use Ghostbusters 2016 to push an agenda:

If the movie bombs --> "you fans hate women, you do not want women to succeed" basic feminism stuff

If the movie will become a hit --> "the major factor of the succees was that we had four women as main cast and not men"

No matter the outcome, the bold move will be used by feminists to push their agenda.

 

Sorry, but seriously ... who green-lights such a stupid idea of a movie? I mean it's the same miracle why Adam Sandler gets 70 million dollars to make Jack & Jill, yet it blows my mind.

​First and foremost, I definitely agree on Adam Sandler. He has had SOME good ideas, but a lot are not exactly the best.

Secondly, one of the things I have noticed is that any time certain extremist groups have a chance to use something in the media as an example, either positive or negative, there are people who will gladly eat up whatever is said without questioning it, rather than putting thought and research into what has been said. Further, there are also those who won't even go as far as to think about the particular item in question other than "I liked that movie" or "That book was so-so".

I feel that someone who claims to be a feminist uses this movie's failure or success to push their own agenda would be the equivalent of someone who is Christian using the success or failure of Passion of the Christ as a way of stating the group they are part of or support is somehow being persecuted or having a significantly positive impact. Either way, it's an extremist taking something out of context and not realizing that it comes down to one thing at the end of the day: Was the particular media (in this case, movie) entertaining?

I myself am Christian, and I do consider myself a feminist in the sense that I value equality for women. However, I wouldn't base the success or failure of either of those movies as indication of persecution without hard evidence to back that up. Rather, while Passion of the Christ did portray the death of Jesus, it's a very difficult film to watch and sit through and focuses on the most negative parts as a way of generation either sympathy or anger, depending on the person in question watching it. In the case of the new Ghost Busters movie, since they haven't brought it out yet, it's hard for me to say what could drive its success or failure. However, in the case of that versus feminism, it comes down to do they portray the new Ghostbusters in a stereotypical manner? Do they try and purposely make them more "manly" or independent for the sake of promotiing feminism? Or, do they just try to make it entertaining?

And I'll also use that very last question to answer one of the other major points of your post: At the end of the day, it's all about entertainment. I agree, the Michael Bay treatment can definitely ruin a good film. However, with some remakes that I have seen these days, they do manage to add something to it in terms of retelling the story for a new generation, but not to a point where it overshadows the original. Part of the reason we see so many remakes it not just because of a lack of new ideas, but because those older movies have been proven to work and be considered tried and true, standing the test of time. So on one hand it could be seen as being a result of laziness and a lack of effort by Hollywood, but on the other hand, let's consider this: It gives the chance for young people and those that follow to experience movies that have defined what film is, especially when the older versions they may not want to view because of generation gap and being unable to relate to certain "dated" aspects of the movie.

So let's hope the movie industry does do well with this movie and doesn't botch it, either by trying to pander to feminist or any other specific group, thereby causing others to feel alienated, or by simply not putting any effort in and hoping the name itself just draws people in. I'm looking at you, Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...