>I aint afraid of no misogynists!
>mfw internet misogyny gets BTFO and Ghostbusters becomes a smash hit!
>>71868574
You're two weeks early to judge if its a hit.
All we have are good reviews.
Which is not a shock.
>>71868574
I have a pretty decent acquaintance who is super into the feminist stuff, I can agree with some of it. I just don't like the trailers to the new Ghostbusters because for some reason feminists can't be subtle about political references.
I don't hate Ghostbusters, I love it. Have loved it since I was a little boy. I used to run around with my little bro wearing the costumes and proton packs, shooting invisible ghosts. We even said "don't cross the streams!" when we were both pissing into the toilet at the same time.
I'm pretty indifferent to this new movie though, I definitely won't watch it. It looks unfunny as shit and is obviously a platform for useless 3rd wave feminists to do their little political war dance, as though men in the modern western world are still holding them back somehow. Kind of a cheap shot to co-opt a beloved male-oriented franchise for it, but I think I'm above all that drama nowadays. The shit-flinging that surrounds these things is more entertaining than the work they're fighting over.
I think people are dumb to get annoyed by the hijacking of their favourite franchises for greed and/or a political message. Just do what I do and consider it meaningless, overblown fanfiction. It's a shame that the franchise holders aren't interested in making quality additions to these worlds instead of just exploiting an existing fanbase, but nothing they do can take away the original genuine article.
I'm gonna get this video game I've heard so much about, it was obviously made with love for the Ghostbusters, made by fans, for fans. Whenever the world tries to throw this shitty new movie in my face, I'll just close my eyes and imagine they're hyping me for the video game.
>>71868632
Well said.
With the internet, word of mouth is a growing factor in the success of a movie. Reviews can be (and demonstrably are) bought wholesale.
The numbers aren't in on this movie yet, the reviews and scores are too unreliable and most likely based on bribery fraud or political views more than the quality of the movie.
Over the next few weeks, if the movie's good, people will tell each other in numbers that can't be bought and it will make a lot of money. If the movie's bad, the franchise, the aggressive ad campaign and the political blackmail will get enough people in for it to break even, but the opportunity cost (the discrepancy between how much it made, and how much a movie with such a major franchise COULD have made) will be in the backs of everyone's minds at the studio.
>>71868574
Even of it were an all male cast, it wouldn't be any better.
Its just one of dozens of ill conceived reboots of old franchises. Lone Ranger wasn't garbage just because of the redface worn by Depp.
This movie would just be another cheap punchline for late night monologues for a week or two and be forgotten. But it became political instead so you can't do that
It's still amazes me how rabid people in the industry got when avgn told his fans not to play their game.
They don't give a fuck if you like the movie or not as long as you buy a ticket. James telling people not to engage broke their brains.
Women have proven WITHOUT DOUBT that their ability to take franchises from men (because they can't create anything themselves) and scream misogyny and sexism at any criticism to ensure positive reviews is UNPARALLELED.
Men CANNOT compete
>>71870918
/Thread
Go to sleep, Sony.
girl power
>>71870525
Well said.
You go on anonymous image boards to feel like your opinion matters in the world. Loser. This movie will be a hit and will bring the world 4 new kick ass female heroines!
>>71871396
Mr. Fieg please leave.
>>71868574
>Smash hit
We are going to see about that.
>>71871396
Where in that post did I offer an opinion?
>>71868574
It'll be a hit among kids because it's a kiddie film. It's not made for adults or old Ghostbusters fans, which I guess is how Feig wanted to do it.
>>71871396
>Will be a hit.
Let's look at that, shall we?
Fieg's best return was about 100m.
Ghostbusters cost 150m.
Before marketing.
Before merchandise.
Before it turned the internet into an autistic shit storm of SJWs defending it, Nerds opposing it and Sony stirring the pot.
Let's LIE and say the merchandising and marketing only colst 50m. So Fieg just has to double his best TO BREAK EVEN.
Let's also not forget that this won't be in China. At all. So it won't get the Warcraft and Transformers bucks.
Also, let's not forget this >>71868632
And finally, that 100m Fieg made?That's estimated from all his previous films COMBINED
This film isn't standing strong as Sony would have you believe.
>>71871396
You go on anonymous image boards to shill someone else's fake opinion.
The movie will flop hard and you'll continue to be a cocksucking shill.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFI%27s_100_Years...100_Stars
Look at this list of cunts.
I love every single one of them. Those were real actresses.
What the fuck is up with these new cunts who think they're smashing patriarchy with every strong female character?
Just do your job and stop shoving MUH GURRL PWR in my face.
How do we stop this movie bros?
>>71871736
The name ghostbusters alone will make 300 million. Director is irrelevant
>>71871963
You can't. Short of threatening a murder spree.
We wait for word of mouth to spread.
>>71868574
ROASTIES GET OUT
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
The real reason I don't give a shit is because ghosybusters 1 was mediocre as fuck and so was its sequel. I am slightly ticked off about the agenda they are pushing as can be seen in op pic. If I were a self respecting professional woman I would not have been in that propaganda pic of theirs. My work should speak for itself not my vagina
>>71871965
Yes, you're absolutely right. Easily and then some.
Assuming the studio wasn't retarded enough to alienate, attack and insult the nostalgic fans just because a few cunts were sexist and racist...
OH WAIT.
Also, 300m is double budget. Which is usually rule of thumb for Budget+Marketing combined.
So yay, if they make 300m, they break even. GREAT JOB
>>71872100
>I am slightly ticked off about the agenda they are pushing as can be seen in op pic.
Yeah, fuck girls, right?
>>71868574
>the original ghost busters was good
ok mr. reddit
>nu male cucks claiming movie is a hit
>not even released yet
>>71872125
Yeah, all women are whores.
>>71872111
Nostalgic fans and adults aren't even their audience at this point. I think their audience is literally feminists and young children. Bright Scooby Doo style ghosts, sex jokes the kids won't quite get, dumb one-liners one after another, etc. It's clearly trying to be a child's film.
>>71872152
It's released in the UK
The real reason I hate the new Ghostbusters has nothing to do with muh childhood or women. It has to do with the fact that I hate ALL remakes and reboots. There is literally no reason to ever remake a film. Just watch the original. I don't hate Ghostbusters specifically.
>>71872196
Yes, it's for kids and normies.
Yet here it sits with average reviews, alienated nostalgia dollars and word of mouth from it's first day about to hit.
I will be stunned if it breaks anything near 300m.
Regardless of the agenda or not, Sony were Morons to attack the old fans. It will cost them.
>>71872232
The Thing Remake, ie the John Carpenter one and the Fly remake with Jeffy G disagree.
>>71872153
How would you feel if there was an all indian movie and the promotion for it was about how 80% of the crew were all indian workers would you go see it because "fuck yeah indians"? Or do u just want to see a good movie
>>71872363
I don't watch movies anymore at all.
>>71872363
>Bollywood Ghostbusters
Fuck
Yes
>>71872363
Are they holding the sign in front of the theater, preventing me from seeing the movie? Because otherwise, anyone who gives a fuck is a retard. If promotional images for movies trigger you so much, maybe you shouldn't hang out on movie boards.
>>71871963
I have to wonder if threads like this aren't false-flag shills, manufacturing the attacks they want to point to for damage control.
And even if that Reddit thread is genuine, most people have to realise it's a freak occurence made by a loony. Surely people won't point to that and a handful of examples of other pathetic attempts to thwart the progressive liberal media, and expect people to take it seriously. Like they're really under attack from an organised group of online villains, that's a legit excuse for not doing as well as they wanted. We all have to support them in this time of misogynistic oppression!
It's ridiculous, and it won't work in this case. Anita Sarkeesian and her cohorts might've been able to con tens of thousands of dollars out of people with this victimhood scam but tens of thousands of dollars won't cover a hundred million dollar movie budget.
>>71872376
Exactly. The forced gimmick wouldn't work on you nor is it working on me or any other self respecting free thinking individual.
The only ones its affecting are those who are afraid of being labled m isogynists
>>71872423
The only damage control I see is the bitch tears from conspiracy theorists claiming reviewers are feminist Sony shills.
>>71872232
>>71872407
Its representitive of fear tactics the liberals use to get there way. The blm movement also uses these fear tactics by calling anyone who doesn't support dindus getting shot for zerg rushing cops racist pigs. So yes any manifestation of these fear tactics are going to cause this lowly anon sone cause for concern
>>71872222
like i said , you nu male cuck, it isnt out yet
wait til actual market takes hold of it and we see an actual reception of it
>>71870096
>We even said "don't cross the streams!" when we were both pissing into the toilet at the same time.
Hot. Did you ever piss on each other?
>>71872486
>sony doesn't use shills
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1368666.stm
Are they paying you too or are you just that naive? Either way, fuck off.
>>71872486
They don't need to be shills. They just need to give enough of a positive review to avoid the kind of backlash AVGN got just for saying "I won't see it."
>>71872518
No, and it wasn't hot, we were about 5 and 6 years old.
But I did it again at a friend's sleepover when I was about 12. He went to use the toilet befoer bed and I followed him into the bathroom and joined him in pissing into the toilet. I told him not to cross the streams and he didn't.
I wasn't invited back.
>>71872550
>le all-powerful sjw cabal
Okay, THAT is damage control.
>>71872525
He is clearly apart of the left militant wing here to crack skulls and goad us into being angry just ignore him
>>71872505
You will see an actual reception of it.
It won't be good.
>>71872525
Feminists LOVE fifteen-year-old Rob Schneider films.
>80%
/tv/ STATUS:
B T F O !
T F O
F O !
O !
!
>>71872610
I wouldn't know.
>>71872595
You mean when normal people go to see a normal summer blockbuster? Because from inside your hugbox you may think this movie is at the center of some huge culture war, but most people don't give a shit about your anti-woman circlejerk.
>>71872568
I never even implied they were all powerful in fact most media outlets would be ok, but tend to prefer safety. But if you're denying that AVGN got Backlash for his video and that the same would happen to negative reviewers from smaller outlets you're deluded.
>>71872568
You're doing damage control right now anon.
>>71872657
Leicester Square, the largest cinema in the capital had 30 pre booked tickets for its busiest showing on Saturday. Out of a possible 250.
That's a crap result in case you wondered.
>>71872340
rule of exceptions broseph
>>71872775
>ALL remakes
Emphasis theirs.
>>71868574
I don't watch it because is more liberal jew agenda. Doesn't matter if is about women, blacks or homosexuals. Still their agenda, not mine. They can go fuck themselves, but not with my money.
>>71868632
>All we have are good reviews.
We have mixed reviews. Good enough to suggest it's probably funny, bad enough to suggest it's forgettable and not as good as the originals.
>>71872423
Fuck I love the damage control. Keep it coming. Delicious.
>>71872866
Your b8 is stale.
>>71870525
>and how much a movie with such a major franchise COULD have made
See, this is the issue right here. Ghostbusters, outside the Americas isn't that big of a fucking deal. Its a classic sure, but outside the US I doubt anybody gives a shit. It will be a worse reverse Warcraft. Where it will do well in America, but shit everywhere else.
It needs 300 million to even start seeing a glimmer of a profit. I doubt the movie will warrant a franchise. I mean, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 underperformed and Sony killed it, having its sequel and Sinister Six in the pipeline.
If this movie makes 300 to 400 million, I doubt Sony will give it a chance and not just cut their loses.
>>71872924
If laughing at obvious damage control is b8 then you live in a very warped sense of reality.
>>71872967
Here sweetie, have a (You)
Have a nap, you're getting cranky.
>>71872967
>pretending to be butthurt
>not b8
Sweet thing
>>71873083
>le baby retort
Oh shit, I'm dealing with a master here.
>>71873123
>Babymen
Both sides are masters eh?
>>71872949
>Nobody gives a shit
A pandering nostalgia driven flick would have been superb and a safe bet financially.
>>71872733
Shit a brick.
>>71873185
Not entirely.
Psycho was virtually 100% faithful to the original and it bombed harder than america did the japs.
>>71873251
You mean the shot for shot remake except in color?
That was the problem.
>>71872866
I don't consider one lunatic posting hate threads on Reddit as "damage" that I need to "control."
Partly because it's just one exceptional example that only means anything if it's blown completely out of proportion like you are by implying it needs any kind of damage control.
And partly because I don't care when people who aren't me make a jackass of themselves. I'm not even taking sides in this shitshow, just laughing at morons like you who get sucked into it and have to make up these pathetic little victories to gloat over.
You're like sports fans, except sports fans know that the results of a game are ultimately meaningless so we can walk away from it all afterwards and get on with our lives, instead of throwing a tantrum on the internet because some rocket scientist wore a shirt with pictures of women on it or because Sony made a movie with women in it.
>>71873301
You can't win with audiences.
Why would you go watch a flick that panders when you can just watch the original?
>>71873185
Yeah, Ghostbusters isn't Jurassic Park. It doesn't have that huge of a nostalgia factor and it wasn't as big as Jurassic Park was back in the day. Plus the primary fanbase of Jurassic Park is kids and teenagers and unlike Ghostbusters(2016) which manage to completely alienate its original fanbase.
They also fucked up by wasting 150 million on a Ghostbusters reboot/remake.
>>71871396
Well said old chap!
>>71872489
Geez. Her face looks like smashed Play-do.
>>71873367
Fair question, and many wouldn't. Still, if you boil it down there are like 6 stories populated by 7 Archetypes. Everything is a remake or a rehash of stories we told before we had written records. So I enjoy seeing things done differently and well, building on what worked and refining it. GB16 doesn't seem to do that.
>>71873384
Nah, GB easily has those levels of nostalgia if only from cartoon fans. It could have been an easy nostalgia cash grab.
It's pretty sad when even Power Rangers looks to be getting it right by comparison to Sony.
>>71871963
>>71872423
Of course it's a false-flag. The user's posting history is nothing but defending the movie.
https://archive.is/XVfFg
>So... Just to be clear on the logic here... 45 reviews are in, 76% of which are positive. This sub is desperately devolving into conspiracy theories and downplaying any positive criticism... And yet, it's the "shills" who are "ignoring what's happening"?
>Which is vastly more pathetic. I mean, wanting to see something succeed is one thing, but wanting so desperately for something to fail is just so spiteful and childish.
>It's the extent to which the GB hate train rolled on that makes this so satisfying. /r/ghostbusters especially were obsessing over how this movie was going to be the worst film ever and ruin people's careers, etc. the wrote essays about how awful the novelization was. The deconstructed every trailer joke and clip to the most minute detail just so they could parade around how terrible it all was. That's what makes this all so damned funny.
>It's a conspiracy. A year ago Sony recruited me right out of SJW school. I then trained in an underground bunker where I mastered the art of shilling and feminazism.
>I'm a white dude. Assuming that you are as well, I kind of feel like something like this is easy for us to say because we're already over-represented.
>I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I want to write a movie about a group of women." Representation is important.
>I might be in the minority, but I think it's way less weird and sad to make fun of grown men being outraged over a movie about ghost fighting than it is to be one.
>>71870918
This is it. Ghostbusters did not make a remake, but studios are creatively bankrupt and want an easy dollar. As it turns out, putting shitloads of money and marketing behind a reboot doesn't guarantee financial success (see: Fant4stic). The fact that it's women for me would make me say
>why remake it with women
but if they were all male the question would be
>why remake ghostbusters at all
If the movie gets really good reviews I'll probably wait for HBO GO/Showtime Anytime/Netflix and see if there's any spark in it, but right now the consensus seems to be that it's shit compared to the original but not the worst movie of all time.
>>71873384
Ghostbusters doesn't have the huge nostalgia factor compared to Jurassic Park which had a long trilogy and was more recent.
>>71872489
Your objection is noted, Mr Worf.
