Ghostbusters (2016)

Talk about TV shows and movies here. We all watch them, after-all.
User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:07 am

If I randomly combust next year, this movie will be why.
I will watch this film because, as a Ghostbusters fan, I have to, and will explode in my seat.
The more I see about it, the more I hate it.
It doesn't look like a bad movie, it looks like a bad fan film.
Just saw a pic of all 4 ladies in uniform, and it's terrible.
First off, the new uniforms have no logos on them.
C'mon... any business with uniforms, no matter how cheap, has it's name and logo on it.
The originals each had nametags and the logo patched on the shoulder.
Also, the two ladies are just too fat.
Not that the orginal cast were buff or the picture of health, but they at least looked
like they were capable of running around with a proton pack strapped to them.
Kate McKinnon is kind of pulling it off, and Kristin Wiig look alright, but the other two *shakes head*
Then there's the car.
Spoiler:
Image
Looks like a cheap fan made car.
First off, movie or not, no legitimate business would put it's logo UNDER the trim.
That's a stupid design choice, although it's less of a choice than being done simply because that's how the first movie did it.
Then there's the selection of vehicle itself.
I get that you want to go with a 1984 version to remind people the original was made in 1984,
but using an 84 Cadillac Hearse is ugly.
Yeah, I know the original was an ambulance/hearse model, but it had some kind of style to it.
American cars of the 80s are REALLY ugly, but if you're going to go with an '84 anything, I'd rather you just choose something different.
It doesn't look right anyway.
Also, the paintjob.
The original car was almost entirely white.
The only red part were the fins.
This thing has an enormous red cap that really doesn't look good.
It's too much red.
The GIANT yellow light on it is ridiculous.
Was it too hard to just use a regular police-style light bar?
I guess they didn't pay attention to how people complained there was too much junk on top of the Ecto-1 from Ghostbusters 2.
I know I'm being nit-picky here, but it's painful for me to look at.
Then there's the new proton packs.
The new ones look like, again, a bad fan replica of the originals.
Here's a good comparison pic I found.
The new ones are on the left (although I hate you if you couldn't tell).
[spoiler]Image[/spoiler]
Why is it 1984's idea of high technology looks better than 2015?
The Ghostbusters are scientists in the most literal fashion!
Why would their proton pack look like scraps?
Above all, their equipment should look new since they built and designed them.
It's literally a nuclear accellerator.
Of everything else, a proton pack should be the best technology they hold.
The new packs look literally thrown together from junk yard scraps.
Finally, they are filming the movie in Boston.
Boston.
The orginal did most it's filming in actual New York City, where the movie is located.
I know it's common practice to shoot city filmn in just about any city they can afford since, for the most part, you couldn't
tell one from the other without the more notable features, but it just feels lazy combined with the rest that's wrong with the movie.
I'm sure I'll have more to rant about this movie in the coming months, but I am not a happy camper.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
sgtc1
Parallel Rare Duelist
Posts: 4266
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:59 am
Location: Go away.

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by sgtc1 » Fri Jul 10, 2015 9:39 pm

Shout out to dem GhostBusters fan boys. :P
Image
"F*** being normal!" ~EMIN3M

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:22 pm

I thought I couldn't hate this new movie even worse.
And now, after watching the first trailer for the new Ghostbusters film, I hate it even worse.

First, watch this garbage, then read on.


Now for me to unleash hell.
[spoiler]Right off the get go, you can tell they know nothing about the original.
"30 years ago, four scientists save New York"
WRONG!
The original movie only had three scientists.
Winston was NOT a scientist.
He was an unemployed blue collar worker who took the job because it had a "steady paycheck".
Are you just stupid, or just too PC to admit the black guy wasn't a scientist?
Then, the acting is just horrible.
It's all over the top and goofy.
The jokes are all forced and slapstick.

The special effect are somehow WORSE than a movie made in 1984.
They look like the cheesy effects used in that terrible live action Scooby Doo movie, and that was for children.
The ghosts all look like a cross between Scooby Doo and Beetlejuice, the cartoon, not even the movie.
Then they all have this cheesy neon glow to them like Batman & Robin (the George Cloony movie).
What the actual honest frick? (I can barely contain my swearing here, but will for the forum).
I have seen better fan-made YouTube trailers with better special effects.

And what is up with that ghost in the beginning spewing endless Nickelodeon slime onto them?
That's a slapstick gag straight out of one of those Scary Movie films.
The original Ghostbusters was funny, but the characters all pretty much played their roles straight.
This is cheap joke after cheap joke, and it's less than sophmoric.
Where's the subtlety? Where's the finesse? Where's the intelligent humor?
Every joke in this movie is as in your face, prodded with a cattle iron as can be.
It just doesn't feel real.

The most Ghostbusters moment in that whole trailer was Chris Hemsworth's half a second
of walking out in his buff guy white t-shirt and the rolled down jumpsuit.

It's no longer purely hating this movie because they forced a gimmicky gender swap.
It's now clear this is a bad movie ignoring all previous faults it had.
I think once this movie premiers, I might be embarassed to rock my Ghostbusters t-shirt out in public.
I wouldn't want people thinking I support THIS movie.[/spoiler]
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
Nash
Secret Rare Duelist
Posts: 1726
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:02 pm
Location: Barian World
Contact:

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by Nash » Sat Mar 05, 2016 9:03 pm

And now for my favorite quote:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
Last edited by Nash on Sun Mar 06, 2016 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rowwdy Yisb wrote:weow all these h8rz rnt 1337 enuf to roll wiv us Nash
#H8uscoztheyaintuz
Zanrith wrote:
Nash wrote:What else do rich people have?
Love for Donald Trump
Image
Signature is obviously by Evilfaic...
Discord: Ian#1337

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Sat Mar 05, 2016 9:37 pm

I hate to tell you, Nash, but that's not how our YouTube tags work.

To link to a video, such as this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsAVN9q9HfU

You only use the gibberish letters after where it says "v=", in this case, the "rsAVN9q9HfU".
Then slap that between our tags.



Although, after viewing your post with my mod powers, and seeing what video you meant, I agree.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
JhonnyCees
Parallel Rare Duelist
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by JhonnyCees » Sat Mar 05, 2016 10:50 pm

As someone who is literally trying to become a researching physicist, I can already tell from their references to particle and quantum physics that the science used in the movie will be pushed towards laymen using real science terms that sound impressive but have no real meaning if you know anything about the field.

That is a huge pet peeve in movies.
sgtc1 wrote:YGO isn't an old house. It looks more like Chernobyl.

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Sun Mar 06, 2016 1:00 am

Well I'm willing to bet even the original movie didn't exactly the most well grounded science.
It is a fictional comedy after all, I wouldn't hold it to such a standard.

The one character in this trailer who's supposed to be the physicist is standing in front of a white board
with a bunch of math mumbo jumbo on it, and it probably doesn't really mean anything.
It's most likely a bunch of random equations thrown together by someone who took high school trigonometry or calculus.

Heck, that movie "Lucy" was 100% based off the concept that humans only use 10% of their brain, and that has always been known nonsense.

Long story short, I can't fault a Ghostbusters movie for having shoddy science.
They are, after all, using unlicensed nuclear accelerators to capture ghosts.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
Nash
Secret Rare Duelist
Posts: 1726
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:02 pm
Location: Barian World
Contact:

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by Nash » Sun Mar 06, 2016 8:20 pm

MysticJhn wrote:I hate to tell you, Nash, but that's not how our YouTube tags work.

To link to a video, such as this...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsAVN9q9HfU

You only use the gibberish letters after where it says "v=", in this case, the "rsAVN9q9HfU".
Then slap that between our tags.



Although, after viewing your post with my mod powers, and seeing what video you meant, I agree.
Oh no, I've forgotten how to post on YCG ;(
Rowwdy Yisb wrote:weow all these h8rz rnt 1337 enuf to roll wiv us Nash
#H8uscoztheyaintuz
Zanrith wrote:
Nash wrote:What else do rich people have?
Love for Donald Trump
Image
Signature is obviously by Evilfaic...
Discord: Ian#1337

User avatar
XYZ Dragon Cannon
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 11595
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:47 am
Location: Australia

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by XYZ Dragon Cannon » Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:07 pm

It seriously looks like every other generic American garbage comedy movie but they slapped Ghostbusters onto it.
Image
X X

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Mon Mar 07, 2016 12:33 am

I could write a better movie, even if I forced myself to use all female characters.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
JhonnyCees
Parallel Rare Duelist
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by JhonnyCees » Mon Mar 07, 2016 2:00 am

MysticJhn wrote: The one character in this trailer who's supposed to be the physicist is standing in front of a white board
with a bunch of math mumbo jumbo on it, and it probably doesn't really mean anything.
It's most likely a bunch of random equations thrown together by someone who took high school trigonometry or calculus.
Its funny you say that, because I actually stopped the trailer to look at it when I was watching it. There are some equations and such pertaining to particle physics, and relativity theory, and apparently field theory as well, but I have not yet taken grad courses in these so I can't say for sure if they all fit together or are mumbo jumbo, but this is mojo jojo:

Image
sgtc1 wrote:YGO isn't an old house. It looks more like Chernobyl.

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Mon Mar 07, 2016 11:40 am

Again, though, nobody's really going to be fact checking a Ghostbusters movie.
Probably 95% of the people watching ANY Ghostbusters movie, good or bad, don't have the maths knowledge
to even understand what's written there.
I don't even know the meaning of half of it, never mind understand it.

My brain just goes, "That's advanced maths? Alrighty then, that character is super smart."
Not that the acting or writing helps to convey that beyond in your face exposition, but we get it.

See, that's what makes this a bad movie.
Instead of learning a character is smart through storytelling and how the character works,
they literally plop them in front of a bunch of useless numbers and say, "Ms. Blah, you're really good at physics."
That's handholding us through their roles.

Of course, it's a trailer, and not a particularly good one at that, so maybe it's less handholdy in the actual film,
but it still just shoves their roles into our face without letting the story naturally do that.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
JhonnyCees
Parallel Rare Duelist
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by JhonnyCees » Mon Mar 07, 2016 12:22 pm

MysticJhn wrote:it just shoves their roles into our face without letting the story naturally do that.
Thank you for writing this, I knew something was wrong with how they were talking about each other but I couldn't exactly put my finger on it. So much this. I doubt that the movie will be any different than the trailer. It seems as though the main audience is 7 year olds
sgtc1 wrote:YGO isn't an old house. It looks more like Chernobyl.

User avatar
MysticJhn
Super Special Awesome Duelist
Posts: 19618
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:42 am
Location: Amity Park

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by MysticJhn » Mon Mar 07, 2016 2:39 pm

I would honestly rather have no new Ghostbusters than this.
To Discuss Moderatory Actions, Click Here!
If you need an avatar, check out the Avatar Encyclopedia!

User avatar
sgtc1
Parallel Rare Duelist
Posts: 4266
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:59 am
Location: Go away.

Re: Ghostbusters (2016)

Post by sgtc1 » Mon Mar 07, 2016 3:26 pm

I find it funny how so many people hate the whole gender swap thing. I don't mind but ehhh I'm not a huge fan of this so I can't judge so well ig.
Image
"F*** being normal!" ~EMIN3M

Post Reply