![ghostbusters_logo_4[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/86RnTAs.jpg "ghostbusters_logo_4[1].jpg")
What is the agenda behind this movie? Between literally forcing Bill Murray to make a cameo and the entire internet shitting itself because AVGN said he didn't want to watch it, what is riding on this movie that they're so hellbent on it being a success? When was the last time a movie was shoved this hard down people's throats?
>>71136136
>What is the agenda behind this movie?
Making money.
That's the agenda of all Hollywood blockbusters.
/pol9k/ is leaking again
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OG83qBuQ_A8
>>71136157
>That's the agenda of all Hollywood blockbusters.
This.
The people making decisions dont give a single shit about social issues. Its about whatever the best way to exploit the public for cash is.
Never forget this.
>>71136136
>what is riding on this movie that they're so hellbent on it being a success?
Money?
>>71136287
>Its about whatever the best way to exploit the public for cash
I don't know. The commercial shows that it has a terrible fart joke in it. its a shitty cartoon that even kids wouldn't watch.
i completely forgot about this movie. shit, why did you remind me?
>>71136157
Lots of movies come out and flop. This is being shoved down EVERYONES throats, between the public appearances, the james rolfe fiasco being overblown to the degree that it was, and the leaked bill murray emails, something bigger is at play here than making back their budget. If they wanted to make money they would have just made a movie that people will like, and they wouldn't have made such risky choices. If there was only money at stake they would have played it safe and made millions off of a good GB movie.
>>71136136
>what is riding on this movie
A movie formula that they can milk for the next decade. Female rewrites of old movies would become a huge trend requiring zero writing talent on their part to draw hordes of tumblrwhales to give them their money.
>>71136136
The agenda is the same as Anita, con feminists into giving you money by pandering to their stupidity.
There is the Hollywood agenda: make money
Then there is the SJW agenda: women can do no wrong and even if they do wrong you should watch the movie anyway to support female leads.
Sony will do anything to stop this shit show from flopping and SJWs will defend this movie from anything because they don't care about quality, just that wonder are in it.
>What is the agenda behind this movie?
Making money? This is being made by fucking Sony not some tiny little niche indie studio, anyone who thinks all this gender politics bullshit is anything but a marketing gimmick is a total fucking moron.
>>71136287
Amy Pascal made this movie possible and she's a well known "feminist". She's the producer who wanted a film made on Zoe Quinn and GamerGate with ScarJo playing Zoe Quinn.
For once, it's not all just about the money, it's about misplaced beliefs AND Money
>>71136136
People wanted a Ghostbusters sequel with the original cast.
Sony gave them a reboot with a garbage cast.
>>71136428
mind blown. i'll be keeping your theory in mind.
Considering this movie's existence is thanks to not a great idea of rebooting the franchise, but based from the director's/idea guy's twitter of sticking it to some nonspecific misgonists or however you spell it and because he could? Who knows
Virtually all remakes are complete shit, this one will be no different. The only reason anyone is talking about it is because of the reactions people had to the cast being replaced by women.
Instead of just blowing it off because the people complaining were just angry nerds, everyone decided to try and make an issue of it by defending the movie.
You could replace every actor in every scene in every trailer and part they've shown and no one would think it was any better than it looks now. It's not that they're women, it's just a shitty script and shitty idea.
>>71136136
>Budget: $154 million
That's why.
The marketing for the movie is that it's now an attack on feminism if you don't like the movie.
Genius.
>>71137575
>Virtually all remakes are complete shit,
What are some good remakes?
>>71137638
Personally I enjoyed the Dawn of the Dead remake. My opinion on that is more than a little biased though. It was the first "zombie" movie I ever saw and I was only 13 when I saw it so it left an impression on me.
I am aware that it falls flat compared to the original thematically, and that Snyder didn't concern himself with keeping the spirit of the original film alive, and was more interested in just making a slasher movie. With that said, I still consider it a very well made slasher movie, and I've always liked the running zombies more than the slow ones.
>>71137638
Scarface
>>71137638
The Thing
>>71137638
The Departed.
>>71136399
Leaked Bill Murray emails???????
>>71137638
A lot of remakes from before 1990 were pretty good.
>>71136428
I kek'd
>>71137824
I hope don't mean that 2011 piece of shit, if not then yes
>>71136136
Giving work for 3 has-beens and 1 no-name actors. Simple as that.
>>71137849
they threatened his family, it was really sick
>>71137958
What? Thats fucking nuts. Is there a source or is it just rumor?
>>71136563
This.
Their only agenda is damage control. They know it's going to flop.
>>71136136
Demonstrating that women are just as competent as men at movie making, particularly comedy. Of course, instead of doing something original and attempting to stand side-by-side with the achievements of duh patriarchy, they're just playing follow the leader. If women really want to demonstrate they're as good as men, then they should be trying to lead instead of copy.
Also, money.
>>71137638
The Thing.
The agenda is Sony trying to not go bankrupt. They're using all the tactics they can think of to make people go see the movie.
If GB flops, Sony is finished. This is fact. It's their last chance to keep their head above water.
>>71137849
The Sony email leaks showed that the Sony execs were having a difficult time getting Murray to sign on for a cameo, to the point where they were considering litigation.
Murray recently appeared on Kimmel looking visibly uncomfortable with his former co-stars and the Gynobusters. His body language suggested he didn't want to be there.
It's also been confirmed that Murray's cameo character dies (usually a condition for an actor who has to be forced onto a production to reprise some old role they hate).
By conjecture, we can speculate that Sony did in fact threaten to take him to court for not wanting to do the cameo.
>>71137638
A lot of movies are remakes (please don't go all autismal about the difference between remakes, reboots, reimagining, and new adatations of some source material). The Maltese Falcon. The Thing. Scarface.
>>71137849
this guy is memeing >>71137958
but they were up to shady shit.
https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/104704
>>71138128
Wow, that's fucked up.
They've got a lot of money riding on this though so that explains why they'd go to that length to get him to do it.
A lot of people are going to lose their jobs when this movie does poorly. Not surprising they're going to shill it as hard as they can.
>>71136136
They're trying to push it as the tentpole FEMALE EMPOWERMENT franchise.
Ghostbusters is seen as one of the last bastions of male nerd cult-dom. If they succeed in taking it over with women, there is literally nothing stopping them from bulldozing every other property in existence with female characters replacing males.
This is so Hollywood can just remake every movie of the last 50 years with women instead so they don't have to actually create anything.
>>71138270
I can't wait for this unfunny piece of shit to flop harder than Gods of Egypt. I can't wait for the butthurt Huffington Post/Buzzfeed articles about how sexism is the reason it flopped.
>yfw it probably won't flop
>>71138370
>Ghostbusters is seen as one of the last bastions of male nerd cult-dom. If they succeed in taking it over with women, there is literally nothing stopping them from bulldozing every other property in existence with female characters replacing males.
It's not a matter of nerdom sanctuaries so much as finding a new excuse for the creatively bankrupt studios to remake their IPs yet again wtih womyn instead of men.
>>71138404
Judging by all the marketing I've seen, this movie is spending at least $250 million on top of the production budget just to push this onto normies.
It's pathetic.
>>71138371
They'll probably be able to guilt normies less than they hoped (if the average Joe actually cared about representation it simply wouldn't be an issue to begin with) but star power and brand recognition will probably least mean they'll break even.
Honestly i just think this stuff being implemented in movies and tv these days is so little girls can grow up thinking they can be bad ass and/or "funny" too. I don't really think it's pushing the sjw objective well though coz the fat one is still just a fart joke, skinny is vulgar, black is uneducated comic relief and lezzie is still a "sex object"
>>71136136
we've had to put up with this shit for 6 months.
They'll have to put up with our keks and memes for a lifetime.
>>71138128
Who could be behind this?
*rubs hands*
>>71137394
This
>>71137638
The Thing
The Fly
Invasion of the Body Snatchers ('78)
>>71136136
considering you fuckers hate this movie so much, you sure can't shut the fuck up about it
I swear to god it's a conspiracy to make me hate things with a female protagonist.
>>71139806
well yeah, hating something is different to being indifferent
it's about a women empowerment and racial issues portrayed by four strong female characters and the current best comedians in the world
>>71136136
HOL UP REAL TALK
Most of the jokes from the trailer are not based on gender. It's like they took a script written for a male crew, and then just cast it as female and sprinkled in some girl jokes.
Am I the only one who has this impression?
>>71136920
sauce?
>>71136264
that was borderline experimental
>>71140096
>it's like they took a script written by monkeys
fdfy
>>71138046
>sony
>finished
Being the market leader in the consol industry and having the fastest selling platform of all time will surely kill them.
Maybe it will put a small dent in the already beat up Sony Pictures department of Sony, but not much else.
>>71138128
>steinberg
>>71140097
Okusan
>>71137638
Oceans Eleven
Stupid people in positions of power think that there's a growing market for NeoMarxist movies that can be exploited.
The growing opposition clearly just being a conspiracy of sabotage by the Bourgeoise Males who can't let go of their power.
>>71139674
The Holy Trinity of sci-fi remakes if you asked me.
>>71136136
>>71136399
This movie will flop. Not massively, but to the point where they barely break even after it hits store shelves. They'll shift blame of their failure on "angry backwards men" instead of putting all their eggs in the cheap nostalgia cash-in basket.
Keep in mind that Sony has a lot riding on this film, they've dedicated a lot of studio resources and see the reboot as a launchpad for a "Ghostbusters extended universe" Plans for sequels and an animated series have already been drawn up (Ghostbusters Ecto Force). This is the same plan they had for Amazing Spider-Man so we know how well it will pan out. The "creative" duo of Pascal and Feig also think that that Emoji Movie and Sausage Party will be big hits.
>>71137638
True Grit
Scarface
I'll discard Gone in 60 Seconds, I prefer the original. It's also evident that you know jack shit about movies...so fuck off.
>>71136157
If this were the case there'd be more movies like pic related.
Anyone else notice how a lot of the advertising doesn't show the women?
Like the NBA commercials for example. They have to use fucking basketball players in place of the actresses because no one fucking likes that ugly gorilla and that fat smug faced bitch
>>71141240
There are. There's a whole genre of cheap evangelical Christian movies.
Feminism is about getting girls to buy into traditionally male franchises and genres. Science fiction, fantasy, action, video games, whatever. If the choice is between making a great film that 10 men enjoy, or making an okay film that 5 men and 7 women enjoy, then they will take the latter. This is not a quality driven industry.
>>71141667
>If the choice is between making a great film that 10 men enjoy, or making an okay film that 5 men and 7 women enjoy, then they will take the latter.
That's not how it works though. Less than 30% of women in the west identify as feminists. The vast majority of women are just as turned off by this as men are because the movie simply looks like shit.
>>71141427
Pumped out by Christian film studios that release them direct-to-DVD AKA not Hollywood.
>>71138037
It's also oh- so- feminist to have it directed by a man... ;)
>>71139806
they promote it for free, millions of dollars are saved on promotion
although millions of dollars are also being spent
>>71142186
Bad word of mouth does not in fact help a movie. Just look at BvS or Fant4stic.
As a heterosexual male, I'll admit that I like a lot of what you would classify as "chick flicks". When Harry Met Sally, Mean Girls, Sleepless in Seattle, Miss Congeniality...and many more.
Having put that out there now being ripe for criticism, this movie looks like shit. I have no interest in watching it other than a morbid curiosity so see how bad it is...but I wont be paying for it. To feminists, don't give me attitude about not wanting to see a movie that looks like crap.
>Women have tons of disposable income and spending power
>Women are free to spend that money in any way they choose, because this isn't a true patriarchy.
>By convincing women they're oppressed, you dupe them into spending money on your projects and media while also embedding the idea that they need to spend more. It's just one step, there's still a war, etc. Show those grubby little manchildren what for, sister.
It's kind of sad.
>>71137638
The Blob.
The Parent Trap.
>>71136136
There is no secret agenda, they think that a all female remake might make money in today's liberal day and age, and people will like the movie more if Bill is in it so they legally cucked him into it
>>71137638
Haunted Hill.
>>71136136
Has nothing to do with being an all female cast. It's the fact it's a remake of a classic movie. A completely unnecessary remake at that.
I feel like this movie is going to succeed because nothing right happens in this world anymore. I am fully expecting to wake up to news that this movie was a big success.
>>71136399
Cultural Marxism.
Women in the military propaganda like the new Star Wars movies.
Ya know the US military is trying to bring up it's numbers of women to a minimum of 25%
>>71143501
It likely will win the weekend, and nothing huge is opening the week before it, so yeah it could even easily beat Startrek 3 if nobody gives a shit about that too.
>>71143501
It'll probably have a good first few days then immediately drop off like BvS
>>71139674
Came here to post exactly this.
>>71143752
Dude people are gonna see Star Trek 3. Especially since Chekov just died.
>>71140358
...Sony is dying. They're predicted to be bankrupt soon. The ps4 is the only good thing they have.
>>71136136
>What is the agenda behind this movie?
The thinking goes like this:
>Nostalgic old fans + kids + women = 2 times the box office of the original
My view is that they ended up making a film aimed at no one:
>Kids do not care about Ghost busters
>Original fans won't like this
>women don't like action films
>>71137394
>Amy Pascal made this movie possible and she's a well known "feminist".
She's also a bungling idiot who is one of the reasons Sony is doing so poorly. This film is going to be a disapointment.
>>71138046
>>71140358
Sony is way bigger than it's electronics or entertainment. Their Life Insurance and Financial sectors account for 50% of tehir profits. They have those to keep them afloat while the rest of the company does poorly.
>>71144502
They're hurting but a big company like that can hurt for years and years before anything happens.
>>71137638
amityville horror
things actually happen
>>71144535
you forgot
>skincolor minorities think the black character is still rascist or not progressive as stated
>>71144675
>keep them afloat while the rest of the company does poorly.
I wonder since most fields are seperated, can the other profitable sections blame the film section or even close them?
>>71137638
Pretty much any sci fi remakes from the late 70's/ early 80's
The Fly
The Thing
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
>>71136136
There is no agenda. Genda swapping the cast is just an easy way to remake the movie without having to necessarily live up to the previous cast.
>>71138404
Well it's competing against movies that are much better and it's only digging the hole deeper with the advertising since normies see how shit it is and decide they don't want to see it. It'll flop anon, don't worry.
Because the producers are toddlers who won't simply admit they went too far in some places, but keep making shit worse when trying to establish damage control. They dug a hole too deep into the earth without a ladder, anon.
>>71136136
>literally forcing Bill Murray to make a cameo
Source: /r/kotakuinaction
>>71144580
Oh yeah that's for sure, After this film she's out anyway because of the leaks and some comments about Obama she's made. But yeah she might be even worse than Rothman
>>71146020
Wikileaks, it's known information.
>>71146020
More like, Source: leaked Sony e-mails threatening to sue Bill Murray for not participating
Faggot.
>>71137638
Inglorious Basterds
>>71146147
>>71146162
I see. You retards read something you don't understand, and assume it means what you want it to mean. Now I know who is shitting up /tv/ with constant Ghostbusters threads. I guess I should hide them all from now on. But YOU could save ME the trouble by just fucking off back to plebbit.
>>71146262
Go away Paul, nobody likes your movie.
Are we still pretending to love the original ghostbusters? Ok.
>When was the last time a movie was shoved this hard down people's throats?
Star Wars a few months ago.
>>71146262
I see. You are a retard who read something you don't understand as well. Mostly due to the fact that you must not have read it. It was pretty clear.
>>71136247
this. every fucking time I open up /tv/ it's full of shitbusters threads.
>>71136136
At this point, they're on damage control. They know their movie's gonna flop, and they're trying to minimize their losses as best they can.
>>71139355
yfw the jokes and infamy of this movie will be infinitely more entertaining than the shit-flick itself
>>71140052
well meme'd.
>>71146395
Also every time there's a "summer blockbuster" they want to sell.
>>71143659
Why would the military want to make itself worse? Whats the point? Feminists and/or liberals baawwwwing their eyes out or what?
>>71137394
>>71138371
I wonder how meme worthy it will be in the end. The pre-release stuff gave us a few gems so I hope this trainwreck continues to provide amusement long after it flopped.
>>71140779
I don't think there is a bigger cuck than the leader of the leaf people.
>>71143752
The Paulk Walker effect will ensure nu-Trek 3 will be a hit.
>>71146262
Damn, you Sony marketers sure are desperate to protect flopbusters.
Reminder that Pixels didn't flop
>>71147436
That's really embarrassing.
>>71146262
>sony marketers so desperate that they've started crying out "reddit!"
this is embarrassing
>>71148207
She's an ugly fucker so it's not really surprising.
>>71137782
literrally the only one good and better than the original
>>71137638
3:10 to Yuma
>>71147436
Molly Fitzpatrick needs 2lrn2journalism
>>71136136
Feminism is trending and there's a huge backlash if you appear to be against it. They're just exploiting this fact to make lots of cash.
>>71142004
Paul Feig is not a man.
>>71147980
stop, pls no
>>71137580
/thread
OP is blowing it way out of proportion though, no one I know is even talking about the movie at all. The internet isn't real life.
>>71150248
Check your privilege.
>>71146435
Better than all the Nickoldeon flavour of the month paedo threads
>>71138059
>we can speculate
its written black on white
>>71142735
>There is no secret agenda
good goy
>>71137638
avengers
>>71147436
>not posting the best version
