Ghostbusters Review Thread [Certified Fresh - 75%]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messofanego said:
ghostbusters_2016_by_digi_matrix-da9vj2h.jpg

Came back from seeing Ghostbusters with my kid cousins. They loved it. Was a lot of fun.

Now want to see it another time and in 3D cause heard it's exceptional apparently.
Click to expand...

How old are your cousins? My daughter is 8 and wants to see it, but my wife doesn't like her seeing PG-13 movies so we "Screen" them first for her.
 
Trokil said:
It is 48% among top critics, Thor the dark World is 46% for example on top critics. Of course they wait.
Click to expand...

This isn't targeted at you but something I noticed with this movie in general.

Not even once have I ever seen people distinct between "All Critics" and "Top Critics" or treat them any differently when discussing movie reviews or the RT score.. In fact, most fanbases would discredit "Top Critics" as mainstream idiots or shills on a regular basis. It screams of moving goalposts to me.

Also, the official guideline is this:

Movies and TV shows are Certified Fresh with a steady Tomatometer of 75% or higher after a set amount of reviews (80 for wide-release movies, 40 for limited-release movies, 20 for TV shows), including 5 reviews from Top Critics.
Click to expand...

5 Top Critics is all they need. Right now there are 21, 10 of which are positive.
 
SilentRob said:
This isn't targeted at you but something I noticed with this movie in general.

Not even once have I ever seen people distinct between "All Critics" and "Top Critics" or treat them any differently when discussing movie reviews or the RT score.. In fact, most fanbases would discredit "Top Critics" as mainstream idiots or shills on a regular basis. It screams of moving goalposts to me.
Click to expand...

Well the problem is, if they gave it a certified fresh like Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and the fans go after the movie afterwards like the did with that movie, they would start to lose again some of their credibility or influence.

And with Crystal Skull it was all critics 77%, top critics 62%. Star Trek into Darkness it is 86% all critics 80% top critics, Thor the Dark World 66% all critics, 46% top critics, BvS 27% all and 20% top. With Ghostbusters it is 78% all and 48% top. A 30% difference is quite a lot actually and not something you will find a lot. Maybe the will wait. It also stil at 59% on metacritic.
 
Stallion Dan said:
If you're a fan of his a "No, not seeing it" really isn't what you would want to hear from him. He has made it very clear numerous times over the years how much he is a fan of GB, ridiculously so, so a lengthy explanation to his fans of why he isn't seeing it really is both expected and needed.
Click to expand...

I didn't expect or need it. Quite a few of the reviewers I've followed haven't reviewed every movie. When that happens, I just shrug my shoulders and think "He/She didn't review it probably because they couldn't get around to it." If Angry Video Game Nerd never reviewed Ghostbusters 2016, I wouldn't have thought anything of it. Then again, I don't go to Angry Video Game Nerd for movie reviews. I used to watch his over the top angry video game videos. If I want to know what someone thinks about a movie, I'll chat with trusted friends, or watch a Jeremy Jahn's or Chris Stuckman review. I'm sure the more hardcore AVGN fans would be curious about why he wasn't doing it, but even so, a "I'm just not interested in the movie, so I won't be doing a review. Sorry," seems like it would have been enough for most reasonable people. A 7 minute video on why this movie displeases him and he has no interested in it just wasn't necessary. But if people wanted that, it's no big deal. Personally, I think it came off as childish and whiny.
 
Figboy79 said:
I didn't expect or need it. Quite a few of the reviewers I've followed haven't reviewed every movie. When that happens, I just shrug my shoulders and think "He/She didn't review it probably because they couldn't get around to it." If Angry Video Game Nerd never reviewed Ghostbusters 2016, I wouldn't have thought anything of it. Then again, I don't go to Angry Video Game Nerd for movie reviews. I used to watch his over the top angry video game videos. If I want to know what someone thinks about a movie, I'll chat with trusted friends, or watch a Jeremy Jahn's or Chris Stuckman review. I'm sure the more hardcore AVGN fans would be curious about why he wasn't doing it, but even so, a "I'm just not interested in the movie, so I won't be doing a review. Sorry," seems like it would have been enough for most reasonable people. A 7 minute video on why this movie displeases him and he has no interested in it just wasn't necessary. But if people wanted that, it's no big deal. Personally, I think it came off as childish and whiny.
Click to expand...

When he made a 7 minute video on the Godzilla trailer http://youtu.be/pCCDQTlE_Ng saying it pleased him and he was interested in seeing the film, was that also childish and whiny? Or do you think all comments on movie trailers should be happy thoughts?
 
Wereroku said:
My wife ranted at me for 30 minutes when I told her I liked highlander 2.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this comment.

There never was a Highlander 2 or 3 or tv series or a movie that brought together the tv series and the only movie that was made.

Is this proof of an alternate universe?
 
spookyfish said:
I don't understand this comment.

There never was a Highlander 2 or 3 or tv series or a movie that brought together the tv series and the only movie that was made.

Is this proof of an alternate universe?
Click to expand...
Maybe that's lingo for "also". There can be only one person who likes Highlander in that household...
 
spookyfish said:
I don't understand this comment.

There never was a Highlander 2 or 3 or tv series or a movie that brought together the tv series and the only movie that was made.

Is this proof of an alternate universe?
Click to expand...

But the TV show is actually the best Highlander media out there.
 
Stallion Dan said:
Trailers are made for you to judge a film before seeing it, with the intention to make you think it looks good enough to pay money to go see it.
Click to expand...

No, that's fucking dumb.

Trailers are made to *entice* you to see the film. Fair enough if you say that the trailer didn't do a good job of enticing you to see the film. But to say that the trailer is made for you to judge the film is dumb-ass statement.

If we go by your train of thought, the trailer to Prometheus is an indication of an exciting adventure film in the vein of Alien/Aliens. But lo and behold the trailer was hardly a representation of the film, which was shitt-tastic. The trailer made the film look more interesting that it really was.

In reverse, the trailer for Finding Dory was by-the-number and dull, but the film itself was much much better when viewed in its entirety.
 
Replicant said:
If we go by your train of thought, the trailer to Prometheus is an indication of an exciting adventure film in the vein of Alien/Aliens. But lo and behold the trailer was hardly a representation of the film, which was shitt-tastic. The trailer made the film look more interesting that it really was.
Click to expand...

Good trailer if it gets you to see it.
Advertising man.
 
Lupercal said:
Good trailer if it gets you to see it.
Advertising man.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's not an indication of the film itself, which is what the poster I quoted said. Prometheus trailer was fantastic, out of this world product. Prometheus film was shit-tastic. It's dumb to think that the quality of the trailer is an indication of the quality of the film itself.
 
Replicant said:
Yes, but it's not an indication of the film itself, which is what the poster I quoted said. Prometheus trailer was fantastic, out of this world product. Prometheus film was shit-tastic. It's dumb to think that the quality of the trailer is an indication of the quality of the film itself.
Click to expand...

...bu...but it's certified fresh!
 
Lothar said:
When he made a 7 minute video on the Godzilla trailer http://youtu.be/pCCDQTlE_Ng saying it pleased him and he was interested in seeing the film, was that also childish and whiny? Or do you think all comments on movie trailers should be happy thoughts?
Click to expand...

I don't know why you're being so hostile, but him being excited about a movie is the opposite definition of "petulant" and "whiny." Those aren't the two words I'd use to describe someone excited about a movie instead of disinterested in a movie. That's literally not the definition of those words, so I don't think the point you were trying to make worked out for you there.

Actually being legitimately indignant because a new movie in a franchise that you're in love with isn't what you wanted or expected it to be is just weird to me. Going to the extreme and making a video expressing how disinterested you are in it is even weirder.

I'm a diehard Ghostbusters fan too. I would have absolutely loved it if we had gotten a Ghostbusters 3 with Bill Murray, Dan Akyroyd, Ernie Hudson, and Harold Ramis. Back in the early 90's, when they weren't pushing 70. That dream of a legit GB3 died back then, but at least we got the awesome video game that was pretty much a third entry with the original cast. But we live in the real world, and a third GB movie didn't happen, so Sony decided to reboot it with a new cast. You can either accept that or move on. Endlessly lamenting it won't change it.

I just find it interesting how many people chose Ghostbusters 2016 as their hill to die on. There have been a lot of remakes and reboots, I just wonder why Ghostbusters is the one that snapped people's brains.
 
I've noticed a lot of the critics who disliked this film writing bits that basically amount to "well, the first Ghostbusters sucked too, so w/e". Like, check out this guy from the LA Times that says

Forced to choose between another viewing of one of Ivan Reitman’s two “Ghostbusters” movies or Paul Feig’s feminist reboot, I’d opt for the latter in a heartbeat, if only for the pleasure of hearing McKinnon toss off lines like “I improved beam accuracy by adding a plasma shield to the RF discharge chamber.”
Click to expand...

And this was a negative review too lol.
I'm betting there's a fair amount of critics with an axe to grind with the original movie after hearing it get praised endlessly for decades.

I'm gonna watch the original on Friday though and the reboot on Saturday, just to compare them with fresh eyes as I haven't seen the first GB in forever basically.
 
Goodstyle said:
I've noticed a lot of the critics who disliked this film writing bits that basically amount to "well, the first Ghostbusters sucked too, so w/e". Like, check out this guy from the LA Times that says



And this was a negative review too lol.
I'm betting there's a fair amount of critics with an axe to grind with the original movie after hearing it get praised endlessly for decades.
Click to expand...

Who would turn down a chance to rewrite history?
 
Messofanego said:
ghostbusters_2016_by_digi_matrix-da9vj2h.jpg

Came back from seeing Ghostbusters with my kid cousins. They loved it. Was a lot of fun.

Now want to see it another time and in 3D cause heard it's exceptional apparently.
Click to expand...

y'all a bunch of shills

hand me some of that sony $$

- john d. youtuber

Stallion Dan said:
Do you know how silly that sounds?


Trailers are made for you to judge a film before seeing it, with the intention to make you think it looks good enough to pay money to go see it.
Click to expand...

I clarified what I meant with future responses. It's one thing to think something looks bad upon the first trailers and another thing all together to think it looks bad and not even be willing to accept that it may actually be good once reviews start hitting. There are people who wrote off this film from jump and took pride in the fact that their minds couldn't be changed on this.
 
Sanjuro said:
...bu...but it's certified fresh!
Click to expand...

Well, then that means a lot of people/reviewers think it's a good film. I'll go see it if I think I like the topic, which in this case, I do. Got a ticket for Saturday.

messofanego was a Marvel shill and now Sony shill. What else is new?
/jk
 
brandonh83 said:
That has absolutely zilch to do with it.

"Top" critics are no different than any other to me, they may write better or be more knowledged or whatever, but they still just have opinions like anyone else.
Click to expand...

I also pay no special attention to the opinions of more intelligent, more knowledgeable or more educated people.
 
GorillaJu said:
I also pay no special attention to the opinions of more intelligent, more knowledgeable or more educated people.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you shouldn't. But being educated on a matter doesn't necessarily make one's opinions superior. They're still opinions. Ebert gave Blair Witch Project 4 stars. I agree with that, but a lot of people don't.
 
It's just the fucking Ghostbusters. This is not cinematic history. It's a stupid movie, maybe a funny one, that will be forgotten in a year.
 
brandonh83 said:
That has absolutely zilch to do with it.

"Top" critics are no different than any other to me, they may write better or be more knowledged or whatever, but they still just have opinions like anyone else.
Click to expand...
The fact that they write more eloquently and are more knowledgable is exactly what makes them different than like any shmoe on an Internet forum or other place.

And exactly why people care more about their opinions.
 
Figboy79 said:
I just find it interesting how many people chose Ghostbusters 2016 as their hill to die on. There have been a lot of remakes and reboots, I just wonder why Ghostbusters is the one that snapped people's brains.
Click to expand...
Yup. I wonder why...

Goodstyle said:
I've noticed a lot of the critics who disliked this film writing bits that basically amount to "well, the first Ghostbusters sucked too, so w/e". Like, check out this guy from the LA Times that says

...

And this was a negative review too lol.
I'm betting there's a fair amount of critics with an axe to grind with the original movie after hearing it get praised endlessly for decades.
Click to expand...

That's why reviews are where they are. Some reviewers didn't care for the original and therefore have no interest in this one, other reviewers hold the original on a pedestal and therefore dislike this one.

I honestly wonder how the reviews for this movie would be in a vacuum.
 
This bears repeating:

Average rating of all critics - 6.7

Average rating of top critics - 6.2

The top critics aren't trashing this movie or anything. Most of their reviews are just right on the border of being fresh.
 
Figboy79 said:
I don't know why you're being so hostile, but him being excited about a movie is the opposite definition of "petulant" and "whiny." Those aren't the two words I'd use to describe someone excited about a movie instead of disinterested in a movie. That's literally not the definition of those words, so I don't think the point you were trying to make worked out for you there.

Actually being legitimately indignant because a new movie in a franchise that you're in love with isn't what you wanted or expected it to be is just weird to me. Going to the extreme and making a video expressing how disinterested you are in it is even weirder.
Click to expand...

That's not being hostile. I was seeing if your issue was all movie trailer reviews or just movie trailers reviews that aren't happy. Both cases sound bizarre to me. You said the review was 7 minutes long and wasn't necessary. The good review of Godzilla was 7 minutes long and wasn't necessary either. Why do you have a problem with one and not the other?

Why is it okay to make a video expressing that a movie trailer makes you interested and not okay to make a video expressing that a movie trailer makes you uninterested? This makes no sense.

I just find it interesting how many people chose Ghostbusters 2016 as their hill to die on. There have been a lot of remakes and reboots, I just wonder why Ghostbusters is the one that snapped people's brains.
Click to expand...

I know. One person can't say they don't want to see a movie without being called childish or sexist. (The person calmly expressing a dislike isn't the one who's brain is snapped)
 
Lothar said:
That's not being hostile. I was seeing if your issue was all movie trailer reviews or just movie trailers reviews that aren't happy. Both cases sound bizarre to me. You said the review was 7 minutes long and wasn't necessary. The good review of Godzilla was 7 minutes long and wasn't necessary either. Why do you have a problem with one and not the other?

Why is it okay to make a video expressing that a movie trailer makes you interested and not okay to make a video expressing that a movie trailer makes you uninterested? This makes no sense.



I know. One person can't say they don't want to see a movie without being called childish or sexist. (The person calmly expressing a dislike isn't the one who's brain is snapped)
Click to expand...

I didn't watch his review of Godzilla because I don't care what Rolfe thinks of movies. I only watched the Ghostbusters one because everyone was harping about it, and I wanted to have an informed opinion on it. I came away from that video thinking he was being a petulant, entitled, man-baby. He acts as if what he wants for Ghostbusters is what's right for Ghostbusters because he's an uber-fan. A lot of us are uber-fans. But a lot of us also realize that this new reboot isn't hurting anybody or even the Ghostbusters brand. The hardcore fans know that this movie isn't going to erase the original two. Those fans aren't going anywhere, because they're diehard. And a small niche of we're being honest. This movie is an attempt to broaden the reach of Ghostbusters to more than just that hardcore niche. And they're going about it by capitalizing on the heat of Paul Feig and Melissa McCarthy.

Naturally, because this movie isn't what diehard fans want to see, we bristle at all of the changes and the tone and perhaps the direction of the film, but ultimately, it's not going to hurt our small, devoted niche group.

Best case scenario: the movie is good, and Ghostbusters has now brought in a new and excited fanbase who will probably now be interested in everything Ghostbusters, including the originals. Kind of like how new Doctor Who introduced the character to a whole new fanbase.

Worst case scenario: the movie isn't good, is quickly forgotten, and the small niche fanbase goes back to being a small, niche fanbase, still loving the Ghostbusters and enjoying the older content, and hoping that the next attempt at a franchise revival is more pleasing.

What I'm saying is: this shit isn't that serious. It's subjective entertainment. Childhoods aren't being ruined. Harold Ramis isn't turning in his grave. Cats and dogs aren't living together. The mass hysteria surrounding this movie is comically embarrassing. James Rolfe's video was one such example of it.
 
orthodoxy1095 said:
The fact that they write more eloquently and are more knowledgable is exactly what makes them different than like any shmoe on an Internet forum or other place.

And exactly why people care more about their opinions.
Click to expand...

Again that's fine. They're still just opinions. It's subjective media regardless. Ebert was brilliant and extremely knowledged yet I didn't agree with him all the time.

Nothing I'm saying is trying to discredit "top" critics. But at the end of the day, they're still just people watching movies.
 
I'm very happy that the internet mob who decided well in advance the movie was going to bomb - in a disturbing number of cases mostly because it was a female cast - are now in denial that the movie does not, actually, suck.
 
I'm a ways into the DP/30 interview with Paul Feig, which has been great so far. For the uninitiated, they do ~30 minute interviews with no cuts, just a long conversation.

Spoiler free, so far it's been about the creative process of approaching the film, given all the potential pitfalls.

The usual GB mob of manchildren are down voting it, of course.
 
I had a feeling it's would be kinda mediocre, outside of the conterversy it looks pretty safe. Still though, the reviews have at least pushed me to see it. Main reason being I haven't seen much hate from critics, and alot of people I trust are saying some positive things.

Also I loved spy so I'll dig it as it's own thing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Snow & White | Review Thread
Community  2
80
6K
GymWolf replied
Kraven the Hunter - Review Thread
News Cringe 
30
3K
AJUMP23 replied
Richard Norton Australian actor, martial artist, and choreographer dies at 75
News 
3
689
jason10mm replied
More Ghostbusters movies are being worked on
38
2K
Just_one replied
Drew Struzan Appreciation Thread
16
343
drganon replied
Top Bottom