Why don't you like it?
>>66833808
Misogyny
>>66833808
Anyone who likes this after seeing the trailer is a racist.
I don't waste my time with flicks.
>>66833808
we like to pretend they are desecrating a masterpiece
>>66833808
Because it's taking the idea of Ghostbusters and using it as a vehicle for a shitty comedy. The CG looks sub-par, most of the gags are either awkward humor or gross-out humor (notable exception: Leslie Jones slapping the shit out of Melissa Mccarthy), and nothing looks like it's even trying to differentiate itself from the original. There's no nuance, no subtlety.
It feels like literally every other comedy that Paul Feig has made with Ghostbusters attached to it.
>>66834252
the original Ghostbusters was shitty too though
>>66834332
Sony is here
>>66834252
I think viewers go into movies like this already hating the movie because it's different -- the main characters aren't your standard MCs that most movies have. This is also why I think lots of people hate on the Tyler Perry and Spike Lee movies.
>cast is all women
>biologically incapable of being funny
>scrape the barrel and use racist stereotypes
>forgot your movie is being made for the SJW crowd
>>66834332
Opinions aside, I'm simply saying that what the new trailer has shown hasn't shown itself to be on par with the original.
>>66833808
I don't like any reboots or remakes at first glance. It's not on me to like a rehash, it's on the remakers to convince me it is good by MAKING it good.
Also ghostbusters 2 was shit anyway so the franchise is crapshoot of quality
>>66834252
>It feels like literally every other comedy that Paul Feig has made
Spy was pretty good
Almost every joke McCarthy was a part of fell flat but most of the supporting characters were funny
>>66834953
>Jason Statham CLEARLY wanting to be in Crank 3
Best part desu
new footage from international trailer right here!!!
http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/
>>66836051
oops wrong link
http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2016/03/08/russian-ghostbusters-trailer-offers-a-whole-lot-more-hemsworth/
>>66836051
Well, there were a couple things that were salvageable in there. The shot in Times Square where there's nothing but Ghosts n' Stuff actually looked a lot better here, if they're trying to show just how powerful the big Twinkie that's amplifying paranormal activities and shit.
Also, looks like Hemsworth's a retard. Go figure.
>>66833808
Not the Ghostbusters III we were promised 7 years ago. Besides which, most reboots end in fail.
>>66833808
i prefer the true "ghostbusters 3"
Because muh soggy knees
Because I don't support misandrist casts
What did she mean by this?
>>66833808
/tv/ told me not to and i'm too dumb to form my own opinion tbqh
>>66834953
Spy would have been horrible if it wasn't for statham. Something went right with his character.
From what I saw in the trailer, it seems to rely more on zany one liners or the like.
The real meat of Ghostbusters was the wit and the interaction between the cast, with zany sight gags being pretty limited.
Even Ghostbuster's grossout gags were mainly witty, take the two Slimings for example.
>Ghostbusters:
A dry, "He slimed me" after a big melodramatic scream. Good delivery
>Ghostbusters (2016):
And it got everywhere, we're every crack-or something. Not very witty, well delivered, and the joke seems to be, "LOL, I got slime up and down my taint and vagina- it's funny because it's weird to imagine me having to clean my taint."
That and the wig scene and the AWW HELL NO really put me off, as did the exorcism scene-"THE POWER OF PATTY COMPELS YOU."
It's just my cup of tea
I wonder how well the toys and merchandise will do... Bargain and dollar stores after the first week?
seems like a good movie to take a girl and talk about how shitty it was after pointing out the worst parts about it and bond in that manner.
I don't like it because Harold Ramis is not involved.
Honestly, there's no reason for this movie to be called ghostbusters. Why not make a comedy about ghost bounty hunters that isn't riding the coat tails of another property? I'll tell you why: scrupt is not good enough to stand up on its own. It's counting on name recognition curiosity to get people in the door. And before you say "but ghostbusters was so iconic you can't do a movie about ghost hunting without getting stacked against ghostbusters and being called a ripoff for it," consider that George Romero made the single most iconic zombie movie against which all are judged and plenty of people make great zombie films in their own right.
>>66836051
Didn't that leaked script from reddit mention a music concert scene?
>>66833808
muh soggy knee
also its a rehash and it looks like dogshit
>>66836879
Hahaha what a cunt.
>people aren't allowed to have opinions because the patriarchy!!
Women aren't funny
>>66834476
bravo
/thread
>>66836879
i wonder if this is a world record in condescension or something
>>66833808
i hate women and niggers.
>>66839213
Kek
Seriously though, someone was actually paid to write that.
>>66839299
i can just imagine some fat bitch sitting there looking at it before posting and thinking shes being really fucking witty
>>66833808
I think it looks awesome. That blonde is hot.
>>66833808
How could I not like it? I didn't see yet.
>>66833808
I'm going into this under the assumption that it's going to be a chick flick parody of Ghostbusters that tries too hard on the humor, uses typical chick flick grossout scenes constantly (ala Pitch Perfect puke scenes), and forces jokes for too long.
I was even optimistic that they just didn't show any of the good jokes in the trailer, but then they had to have the black retard slap the girl again after she should have clearly noticed that the ghost was out of her. It makes it clear the movie is going to treat these characters as bumbling idiots who need facts shoved up their assholes just to get stuff, and that's the joke.
>>66839299
>Seriously though, someone was actually paid to write that.
I refuse to believe that. It has to be from a blog or a tumblr or something. There is not an editor on the planet that would publish that.
Garbage costumes, garbage props, exorcist refernces
Basically the three things a ghosbusters movie shouldn't have.
Maybe they'll re-write the deleted sequence from the first one and have a dude-ghost go down on one of them.
We are just going down the road to having this happen. https://youtu.be/I9fVSsSK7P8
>>66837259
Eh... this is the bid that won the 'squeeze more money out of Ghostbusters' auction. It wasn't a preexisting film that had the Ghostbusters label attached to it.
>>66840591
You did notice the original films were shit, didn't you? Nothing in this franchise has been other than disposable bilge.
>>66833946
Anyone who likes this after seeing the trailer is an idiot
>>66834544
>hasn't shown itself to be on par with the original.
There is absolutely nothing that they could've shown to convey that, save for archival footage of the original.
>>66837073
I'm thinking of actually buying this one. You know, as a little memento of the shitstorm surrounding this turd...
Whops i mean movie.
>>66833808
Because it's not going to be any good. And to make it worse, they know it's not. Look at their faces in the pic you posted. The ones who've done this before know exactly what's up
>>66839299
No, it was a joke article.
>>66833808
I really wish we could all just see this bullshit as a parody but the fact that they're serious with this crap and that these chicks totally look like fucking sjw feminists is simply triggering me to hell and back.
I hope this abomination flops so hard that it isn't even worth for a "Get drunk and watch the worst movies of all time evening".
This wouldn't have happened if based Chris Hitchens was alive.
>>66833808
because it's a cash grab relying on the success of a previous movie rather than trying to stand on its own merits.
>>66836879
Does she realize the irony in what she's saying whilst calling others baby-men?
Many anons have soggy knees.
