Full disclosure, I'm a dude. Alright? So if anything I say offends the ladies in the audience, or even the men in the audience I apologize you need to grow a thicker skin. I don't consider myself a Feminist or an SJW or a MRA or any -ist or acronym. But I do want to see more female led geek movies. If only for the sake of variety in my entertainment.
Anyways, with all the controversy surrounding the Ghostbusters Reboot, with the harsh opinions and strong words on both side of the aisle. With people saying it's a 'political act' to go see the movie. With more outcry for 'female representation' in film and TV, it's time we all asked. What are the consequences if this movie should fail because it's a bad movie?
Because lets face it, judging from what I've seen, it is going to suck, and even with brand recognition it's probably going to bomb, or at least have a serious drop-off after the first weekend.
>>70773753
Nothing. Even if it bombs they'll make a sequel. And politically, nothing is any different because of this movie.
>>70773753
Look how much effort you put into that shitpost bait.
Watch this:
*pppbbbfffttttrrriioplplpllppppblp*
A shit response, just for (you)
>>70773753
It's failing specifically because of brand recognition, the fallout is entirely focused around "why?" with direct comparisons being drawn to what is an irrevocable classic.
It has every appearance of a glossy, insipid cash grab, and that at heart is why it's being raked through the coals.
That being said, the internet is of course being the internet and making it into so much more than that. Throwing in gender politics, name calling, and generally saying very nasty things. Which has the exact opposite effect they want, the internet's kneejerk approach is always low hanging fruit, and the lowest hanging fruit is that this is being marketed as a GIRL POWER movie, so they predictably go after that.
I can almost guarantee that it was marketed as such to provoke that exact response, the internet is incredibly predicable and by doing so they guarantee buzz being generated that paints them as the bastions of gender equality against the misogynistic masses.
It would have the same backlash with different name calling if it were the exact same movie with an all male or mixed cast.
>>70773816
It's not going to bomb.
It's the most talked about movie of the summer.
Good job /pol/.
>>70773753
>What are the consequences if this movie should fail because it's a bad movie?
>if this movie should fail because it's a bad movie?
>if
>
>>7773753
cuck of the year
Curiosity and the political statement gimmick might get people to go check it out. So opening weekend it'll probably pull a decent crowd. But if it's as bad as it looks, word of mouth will likely sink the ship. Audiences haven't been too forgiving this year. And it deserves to fail. Sony and the media have been absolutely disgusting over the last several months.
>>70774103
>It's the most talked about movie of the summer.
Nah that's BvS
>>70774103
>It's the most talked about movie of the summer.
>Only publicity is damage control
>Most disliked trailer on youtube
>Even less awful remakes bombed
>>70774154
What exactly are you trying to say?
I mean Ghostbusters was probably more popular among boys at the time, so pushing a movie with an aggressive "girl-power" attitude simultaneously alienates original fans and young boys while only really attracting SJW types who would be blind to the movie's flaws. This problem would probably be apparent if Hollywood did this to any beloved geek movie franchise. I understand the sentiment about a lack of female leads though. If Hollywood would stop all the fucking remake garbage, it could help put an end to the creative atrophy. Maybe there would be more opportunities for female leads to inhabit original films that couldn't tarnish an established franchise's name.
But then people would probably complain that Hollywood has a feminist agenda if they tried desaturating predominantly male leads in film. I mean none of this would ever happen anyway.
QUICK
SAY ONE POSITIVE THING ABOUT FEMALE GHOSTBUSTERSlmao you can't
>>70774548
I kind of like the spunky new Egon? She's shoehorned in as fuck, but she seems to have life behind her eyes unlike everyone else attached to this movie.
>>70774655
Egon? Oh no, she's not R63 Egon. I can see how'd you'd think that with her superficial similarities to the cartoon version of Egon but if you really look at her, she's actually a R63 Dr. Strangelove.
>Mein Fuher, I can bust!
>>70774868
I can get behind that.
>>70773753
It has nothing to do with the gender of the actors in the movie. I just think a Ghostbusters reboot was the worst idea that NOBODY wanted other than the people wanting to profit off it.
>>70773753
It's going to go through the same arc that Amazing Spiderman did.
>First movie releases
>Moderate success. Not as terrible as people expected, but nowhere near amazing, or really, even particularly good
>Apologists everywhere.
Time passes
>Ghostbusters 2 releases
>An absolute, unmitigated disaster on every level
>The feminist effect has died down significantly by this point, so basically everyone is on the same side now, the movie just sucks
>Sony quietly sweeps it under the rug while they build up their Golden Girls reboot starring gay men
>>70775242
Yes even before it was officially announced I never wanted a new Ghostbusters movie because I thought it would be one of two options.
Either we get 300lb geriatric versions of the original team
OR
We get a team of "hip" new Ghostbusters starring whatever hackneyed comedians were available at the time like Jack Black, Jonah Hill, Justin Long and Kevin Hart.
Actually there is one route I would have accepted, a CG movie with the original cast voicing themselves shortly after Ghostbusters The Videogame in another adventure that takes place in 1994 or something. I never expected what we got however and I knew the moment Paul Feig was announced to be attached to it that he would just make it a quickie cash in for himself and his buddies from Bridesmaids and ta da! That's exactly what we got.
>>70773753
It took you way too many words to say the things everyone on Earth has been saying for months.
>>70773753
Its gonna suck so hard people will create a new word for how bad it sucked.
>>70775552
the slimer in your picture has the same facial expression as leslie jones for 90% of the movie lmao
>>70777696
hahaha, nice.
>>70773753
>Full disclosure, I'm a dude.
Dick or GTFO you rotten faggot.
>So if anything I say offends the ladies in the audience
There are no ladies here.
>or even the men in the audience I apologize you need to grow a thicker skin.
You need to grow past puberty.
>I don't consider myself a Feminist or an SJW or a MRA or any -ist or acronym
Literally nobody cares.
>But I do want to see more female led geek movies.
neat
> If only for the sake of variety in my entertainment.
Could have just said that in the first place you whiny cunt.
>Anyways
Back to reddddit.
>with all the controversy surrounding the Ghostbusters Reboot, with the harsh opinions and strong words on both side of the aisle.
Not a sentence.
>What are the consequences if this movie should fail because it's a bad movie?
There wont be a sequel.
>Because lets face it
back to redddit
> judging from what I've seen, it is going to suck
neat
>and even with brand recognition it's probably going to bomb
cool
>or at least have a serious drop-off after the first weekend.
k
>>70777696
I wonder if Slimer's Oprah impression is as good.
>>70774016
Agreed. The "YOU GET A CAR" scene would've been awful even if the original four actors circa 1984 had said those same lines.
Wes Anderson's favorite cinematographer though.
>>70773753
Does baby man need his bottle
>>70781142
>auteur
>hires a cinematographer
What a fucking hack.
