• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Ghostbusters Review Thread [Certified Fresh - 75%]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zolo

Member
Review scores are going higher than I thought which I'd consider a victory, though the general consensus seems around what I'd expect in 'It's decent' at the moment.
 
9fhq2cZ.gif

Every time I see this girl, I just say wow.
 

Zolo

Member
Well, that sounds a lot better than what I was expecting! But I wonder if an "average" film is good enough to make a thriving cinematic universe.

From the trailers and the previous work of Feige I think this one will just not be for me. Will watch at a later point though, and hopefully I will be able to enjoy it as well.

That'll still mostly depend on box office now. Anything to really compete with in the upcoming weeks?
 
Well, that sounds a lot better than what I was expecting! But I wonder if an "average" film is good enough to make a thriving cinematic universe.

From the trailers and the previous work of Feige I think this one will just not be for me. Will watch at a later point though, and hopefully I will be able to enjoy it as well.

I have a feeling that if it does well enough to get the sequel moving, then Sony is gonna pull an Out of the Shadows on us with the sequel and basically have it hit every note that fans wanted to try and pull things back on track. Which is a weird thing to even say considering what fans wanted was a direct sequel with the original cast, but they'll probably try to approximate to that as much as they can. New team, probably mostly men but hopefully still keeping women in the mix too, new story that isn't another retread of the first movie, etc.

Better reviews than I thought it would get. Maybe they put the bad parts in the trailers.

Some of us had the feeling they were "casting with a wide net" so to speak with the trailers, and putting in all the loud slapstick shit to cater to the lowest common denominator. All of Feig's movies have brash and crass humor in them but they also have a lot more, and the a lot more parts don't always make for good trailer scenes when you're trying to push a comedy.
 

Noirulus

Member
I knew this movie was gonna review decently. Fucking internet nerds always need something to waste their energy complaining about.
 
I think the issue is that it's more difficult to get movies like Star Wars off of the ground nowadays, not that it was easy back then, but studios were willing to take risks. Most of the big movies are based on something whether it is a sequel or remake or adaptation. That's my issue with remakes. But that doesn't mean I can't enjoy the occasional Ocean's Eleven.

I mean, once you get above the $50 million (which is a lot of money), you need to convince a studio that your movie will succeed. That means big names (director or star) our an existing property you can point to.
 

B33

Banned
It still weirds me out how they apparently put the worst parts in trailers.

Sony's American marketing division is bad plus it's hard to capture Paul Feig's "brand" of comedy in a trailer. It works better in context.
 

rekameohs

Banned
It still weirds me out how they apparently put the worst parts in trailers.
Zootopia did it best. It's hard for a comedy to show off lots of its best jokes in the trailer, because they've got to save some for the film. So Zootopia took a single joke, which might be its best in the film, showed the whole scene out of context, and didn't spoil anything else in the movie. Certainly got my ass in there
 

groansey

Member
Since it has some positive reviews i maybe gonna watch it in some years when its on free tv.

If you have even a mild interest in this film I'd encourage you to pay to see it. Unless you're happy with the endless stream of Marvel and DC flicks every Summer.
 
If anyone is an expert of sexist attacks, it's Mundane Matt.

So according to your logic if someone criticizes a movie's quality that happens to have women in it then that person is sexist?

Dude that no makes logical sense whatsoever.

Why get so personal and attack someone for their opinion on a movie you haven't seen yet,

And weren't people super salty in the locked review thread yesterday over WrecklessEating's negative review of Ghostbusters?

I dunno calling someone salty when you yourself seem pretty salty comes off as kind of hypocritical.
 
I mean, once you get above the $50 million (which is a lot of money), you need to convince a studio that your movie will succeed. That means big names (director or star) or an existing property you can point to.
Which sucks. Adjust for inflation, Star Wars budget was $46 million. And I get the reason why. It just sucks :(
 

Zolo

Member
Don't worry, they'll find ways to spin it into the worst movie of the decade.

Eh. Crystal Skull has a 77%, so it's not like one can't dislike a movie just because it has a high-ish score. In the same way, high scores doesn't point to some conspiracy; just whether the reviewers liked it.
 
So according to your logic if someone criticizes a movie's quality that happens to have women in it then that person is sexist?

Dude that no makes logical sense whatsoever.

Why get so personal and attack someone for their opinion on a movie you haven't seen yet,

And weren't people super salty in the locked review thread yesterday over WrecklessEating's negative review of Ghostbusters?

I dunno calling someone salty when you yourself seem pretty salty comes off as kind of hypocritical.


It's almost like he has a well known history or something....

Mundane Matt is prolific GG member.

His sexism is well established beyond and far prior to GB 2016. He's also promoting positive reviews are a conspiracy.

Come on. Maybe understand who we are talking about before you start accusing people of whatever generalizing you're accusing people of.
 
I mean I guess but Star Wars wasn't a risk at the time.

Are you talking about the very first Star Wars? Most major film studios passed on it and Fox was so sure it was going to flop, they essentially handed Lucas the key to the film's merchandising rights.

It was very much a risk at the time. Many people had no faith in the film whatsoever.

A typical freenudemacusers post. Something meant to be funny but is far from it.

The post may not be funny (though kudos to using the term "nailed on a cross" in regards to BvS), but the reactions to it totally are.
 
So according to your logic if someone criticizes a movie's quality that happens to have women in it then that person is sexist?

Dude that no makes logical sense whatsoever.

Why get so personal and attack someone for their opinion on a movie you haven't seen yet,

And weren't people super salty in the locked review thread yesterday over WrecklessEating's negative review of Ghostbusters?

I dunno calling someone salty when you yourself seem pretty salty comes off as kind of hypocritical.

Matt has a history with being affiliated with GG and makes up a lot of BS when it comes to the topic of feminism and diversity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom