what does /tv/ think of "baby-men"?
What's it called when people make up a bunch of people who have a problem with their film because no real ones actually exist and they see it as the only way of selling their shitty remake?
>>71919946
feminism
>>71919575
>Let the liberal media tell you what's what.
This movie is going to flop hard, despite all that.
The diversity-pushing media might be celebrating as the next best thing after Citizen Kane for all I care, the people won't like it cause it's a shitfest, regardless of the political agenda it serves.
The real question is...will it be popularin China?
Do actual feminists support this movie or is it just women on twitter who are easily swayed by the promoters, marketers & cultural commentators?
>>71920206
China bans anything to do with deadies and spirit voodoo so it wont be coming out there
>>71919575
I don't give a shit about Marvel, Ghostbusters, Star Wars or anything else with a "Cinematic Universe", appeal, does that make me a misogynist?
>>71920291
Then it is doomed. They really didn't think this through. What was their plan again?
>>71919575
Another sjw buzzword for unimaginative retards to blurt ad nauseam.
>Fieg's Ghostbusters is its own definative creature, an affable inventive riff on Ivan Reitman's proton-packing caper that exists not to score points, but only to make us laugh.
So they're basically admitting that it shits all over the original? And then they wonder why people are butthurt? The cognitive dissonance is real.
They need to go back to /pol/ to cry about niggers fucking their waifus
>>71920219
"Actual feminists" don't exist. Their job ended in the 1960s.
>let's make fun of people! That'll make people want to see our movie, right?
>>71919575
>all those leftist SJW rags
lel
>>71919575
I feel sorry for them if it isn't sarcasm.
>>71920490
>>71919946
What's it's called why you act like people are made up when you visit a board that has so many people like the ones supposedly made up that it's laughable to act like it's fake.
Seriously we had threads for months with those people shitting up this board, but noooo it's all false flag made by the evil scare feminists!
>>71920455
> They need to go back to /pol/
> Blaming the poor victim
Shitlord.
>>71919575
This kind of advertising is reminding me of the 90s.
>>71919575
This is the moment female Ghostbusters haters knew they fucked up
It'll be interesting to see if this movie makes any money. Ten years ago it would have probably been a hit, but people aren't even paying to see GOOD movies anymore.
>>71920724
you go girl
>>71920724
What's it called when they use such a small demographic of people to justify dismissing all criticism no matter who it comes from or why?
why are pissbaby babbymen so pleb?
>>71920766
omg I hate muslims now
>>71920643
there are literally no obstacles preventing women from achieving what they want through merit in western society
what lazy remake/reboot with a female cast will be next?
>>71920930
>tfw I'm a woman in Morocco
;_;
>>71919575
It makes me wounder how many critics do believe what they are saying, and how many of them are just there for the paycheck.
>>71921055
it was pretty good tbqh
>>71919575
The funny thing is that it's men that make these images.
>Here's a summer movie starring a girl squad proud of it's big tacky jumpsuits. You could call that a supernatural event in itself
>>71921055
literally for the paycheck, it would be so damned easy being a critic.
>>71919575
its 50% from top critics. Richard Roeper called it garbage. he knows whats up most of the time
>>71919575
>definative
The Times, everyone.
What's it called when someone who doesn't have anything against feminists dislikes a movie for it's Adam Sandler level humor and gets shat upon by both sides cause everyone on the net gotta be an extremist?
>>71920350
Crashing this franchise, WITH NO SURVIVORS.It's all Sony can do tbqhwy
>>71921676
"Adulthood"
>>71921697
Holy shit, you're right.
>Strip away the controversy driven by a few yahoos with internet access, and the idea of remaking "Ghostbusters" with women is the main thing that injects any life into an otherwise pretty banal summer movie.
>After setting up the slightly revised premise, though, the movie pretty conspicuously runs out of gas about halfway through, yielding lapses where it doesn't scare up much of anything, most notably laughter.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/11/media/ghostbusters-review/index.html
Somebody photoshop an "alt girl" looking type there and caption it "cuckbusters" with a bunch of negative reviews
>>71921676
fuck you, Click is a great movie
>>71920930
>tfw we will literally have a new female PM tomorrow
>tfw Hillary could well become the next President
>>71922046
Pardon my moderatism, but I don't see the problem. Well other than the fact that Hillary is untrustworthy, but that's not related to her gender, and is far better than the alternative.
>>71922117
>that's not related to her gender
Sex. And her election certainly is.
>>71922117
Hilary has actually gotten people killed. The worst thing Trump has done is say some mean words.
>>71922202
>Hilary has actually gotten people killed
Haven't most presidents?
>47.5% fresh from top critics
>59% on Metacritic
Really makes you think.
>>71922117
In reality, US presidents don't have any freedom beyond foreign policy. They are pretty weak individuals.
Wait, if a nu-male is making fun of GB haters why did he put a caricature of himself and his comrades in the image?
>>71919575
Sounds like some great new porn
>>71919946
THe movie got 3.6 on imdb, few movies are that bad and this one definitely isnt worth a 3.6. Look at the imdb comments nothing but angry guys.
Honestly the only guys that get upset seeing women in ghostbusters are guys insecure about their sexuality and feel threatened by any woman with power. In other words the average /tvirgin.
>>71922518
I'd watch half of the main cast in that.
>>71919575
>fun
>summer
>blast
People don't hate this film because it's a film with a female cast, people hate it because a poorly constructed cash grab has been made with the source material of a beloved movie/franchise that is apart of many people's childhoods. I am insulted as a man disliking this movie has labeled me as been sexist, guess what it's a movie and what I see is bad CGI, poor scrip writing and the poor attempts of "comedy" not there are women, it's how the movie it's self sells to the viewer not just these people are in it or it has this big name attached to it. To be honest I love some of the previous work the cast members/director has done such as Spy, Bridesmaids, The Heat, The Skeleton Twins, etc. and it gave me great hope for this reboot if enough effort had been put into it, it might have been a warm welcome to the series, but sadly no.
I do not dislike this film because of the cast, I dislike it because of it's as a poorly constructed cash grab and it lacks the heart and effort of the first movies, because that's all it is.
>>71922388
There is no top critics tomatometer yet, stop with this meme.
>>71919575
It's hilarious.
Everyone can see that the movie legitimately sucks, and all they can do is blame it on internet misogyny (aka the boogeyman).
>>71922202
And you know, engaged in court ruled housing discrimination, several cases of fraud, his name is mentioned over 1000 times in a tax evasion scheme, and white supremacy... but sure... mean words.
>>71922741
That's an obvious photoshop.
>>71922741
>*Ghostbusters does an impressive job* etc
>48%
kek
Looks like they spoke too soon.
>>71922800
Not the same anon. I've just checked the top critic ratings myself. See it yourself.
>>71922800
It is? What's obvious about it? Explain in detail how it's a photoshop. Leave nothing out.
>>71922773
>and white supremacy
opinion discarded
>>71922168
I thought her election was more related to the fact that her opponent is crazier than she is? Hilary is pretty reviled.
>>71922969
It's like 60/40 those two things.
>>71922969
No such thing as bad publicity. Trump is a chameleon, a TV celebrity. He even go as far to recognise that he's bullshitting you.
I've noticed a very strange tendency for certain internet communities )typically SJW-based) to devolve into infantile language whenever they're attempting to insult someone. "Piss/Diaperbaby", usually accompanied by barely comprehensible baby-talk. And the irony is that it's usually directed at someone or some group that the person seems to think is childish themselves. It's like the equivalent of when someone here goes full retard with emoticons and all-caps, but rather than being viewed with bewilderment and derision, it's an established part of their lexicon.
How did this come about?
>78% in RT and keeps going up everyday
How does it feel to be wrong you sexist pigs?
>>71923081
>No such thing as bad publicity
Publicists are responsible for telling you this lie.
>>71923085
Ironically in the age of internet, it is easier to make or find Echoes Chambers where one can vomits one's opinion and never interact or discuss with people who disagrees with you.
>>71923116
I'm still a white male, so pretty good!
>>71923116
>6.6 average.
>Falls to 6.2 if you go by Top Critics.
>>71919575
easy there baitmaster
wait till the boxoffice numbers come out monday
or are you going to call 'money' misogynist too?
>>71923116
It reminds me about the quantity of paid and low brown critics.
>>71919575
The needless politics surrounding this movie are a huge turn-off. People on both 'sides' of it have reasonable things to say. Unfortunately it's not those people who really care to raise their voice above the ones you hear, though. Getting the worst of both sides of any debate means it isn't much of a debate. Which is fine. Baby-men, is that a term developed specifically for this movie's roll out? Seems to be 4chan has been calling these people other things for a long time. I'm disgusted with how a lot of people have been co-opting the sadder aspects of this whole thing for small minded personal reasons. It's turned me off of the movie. I'll watch it. I'm sure it's not horrible. I like the original one(s) and don't expect this to have anything to do with it.
>>71919575
Of all possible demographics, feminists should be the most pissed off at this movie; it's a corporatist attempt to reduce their entire movement to nothing but a money-teat for soulless (mostly male) suits to leech off.
>>71919575
Accurate
>>71919575
The Guardian ran like 10 fucking articles on the front page about how the hate for the movie is just misogynist males being angry before the film came out. There's no way their review would ever be anything below "it's good". Fucking shills.
>>71923116
The Metacritic keeps falling every day. Feels pretty good.
Pic related is an actual pig, by the way.
>>71920930
You misogynist, we need to subsidize birth control pills and abortion so women can be free to live a life of full freedom.
It's sexist to demand women pay for their own reproductive pills.
We can surmise from the Sony emails that this whole thing is a litmus test to see if "expressly pander to feminists" is a viable business strategy, so if this is a success and we are saddled with "feministsploitation" for the next few years, these fucking shills should be held accountable.
>>71922675
Heh I watched that guy's non-review of this movie. The thing I found kind of weak was him stating he's not going to watch it. Fine. The Nerds gunna Nerd. His reasons were apolitical. They were wholesale nerd culture, and not the anti-social autistic, scared of women kind either. He's in love with the old movies. That's it. He's disappointed an actual sequel never materialized. He waxed creatively about what it could have been, and delved into that non-movie's rather sorted and interesting history. I wonder why he was singled out for so much hate? Don't care really, it was funny to watch all of that on youtube, and I'm sure he thought the same. It didn't hurt him in any way. His detractors- perhaps too good a word for them- are too small to gain or lose over what they did to him. Funny business.
>>71922537
At least put some effort into your bait.
>>71923510
Just think of how little publicity this movie would have gotten if not for people mass-shitting on this movie. Like, if we had ignored it, nobody would see it and there would never be a second one. It's almost like if we stop picking at it, it would heal on its own.
>>71919575
>making an image like that and including a 3 star review
>not even a single 5 star
The attempt is goog and the neckbeard ghost looks great but it falls short where it countsI give it a 5/10
>>71923510
yeah but muh mens rightsdo you have the goosebumps power point?
>>71923237
It all goes back to #gg and the war against SJWs. Sad thing is, gg had some good intentions behind it, with strong evidence to back up their claims, but the road to hell and all that, because if you go to their hang out boards now EVERYTHING is a part of the feminist/LGBT/left wing conspiracy, evidence be damned, and as a bi dude with a "live and let live" attitude, that makes your movement hard to swallow, whatever your ultimate intent. It's as if all the negative press and baseless stereotyping the SJWs gave the movement came true because they willed it hard enough.
>>71920930
There are men out there who would disagree. That in itself might be an obstacle, no?
>>71923510
Yup I cringe at the thought of a decade of misandrist humor and media saying if you're against it you're a sexist manchild or that men deserve this for shit like old Bond movies that belittled female characters.
>>71919575
>The Guardian
>Telegraph
Did /pol/ make this?
>>71922773
You came to the wrong website, shitskin.
>>71923373
>that look of nervous concern
>>71923373
RT is better and more accurate.
>>71923591
>the obstacle of opposing viewpoints
Gee that's a uniquely female problem, us men all see eye to eye on everything!
>>71920490
>>71920930
If anything they have advantages over men, which makes their inability to achieve anything worthwhile even more pathetic.
>>71923637
Bullshit. RT accepts too many wannabe critic bloggers. Even then, the average on RT is still 6.6, so it doesn't make much of a difference.
>>71923599
Not gonna happen. One day there'll be a scandal where the SJWs push their luck little too hard, and society as a whole pushes back.
>>71921591
>knows what's up
>said TFA is amazing
pls
I'll give this movie 5 starsout of 100
>>71923581
You have to go back.
>>71923561
They made this whole thing as obnoxious as possible to stir up controversy. I'm sure they were banking on people getting annoyed, and even if they didn't, they'd just have found some other way to shove it in our faces.
Sony are in trouble - most of their recent movies have flopped, and I'm willing to bet this is a desperate experiment.
>>71923733
6.6 means its a good movie. Keep on hating you pathetic male.
>>71921591
>most of the time
He doesn't at all
Hes a bigger pleb than that jawless hack ebert
>>71923637
>RT
>6.6/10
>top critics on RT
>6.2/10
They're all pretty close?
>>71923581
Sorry bi-dude, I don't know what #gg is. I don't spend any time on any of this stuff. Live and let live is good until you get undeserved attacks. I'm a boring white guy that likes his job and his relationships. I like art and entertainment, not the thoughts of those who made it, unless their work is clearly about their thoughts, but then I wouldn't find it appealing in the first place. The loudest voice on any side is a lightning rod and collector of idiots, no matter what the debate, no matter when in history. I don't really know what the hell you're talking about, but you seem intelligent and I'll read more if you want to continue.
>>71923823
Actually 6.6 is more along the lines of average, which is what everyone suspected.
>>71923573
>do you have the goosebumps power point?
Is that the one where they put "fart jokes" or something equally stupid under the "appeals to men" tab, or am I thinking of something else?
>>71923823
>6.6 means it's good
>5.9 means the site is shitty an inaccurate
Why are you so desperate to die on the hill defending this movie? It's an average summer comedy flick that is obviously going to be forgotten about a month after it leaves theaters
>>71923837
He's a r*ddit faggot trying to spew his sjw nonsense in a more insidious manner than the usual screaming.
>>71923720
Tom Cruise is too good for you to use
>>71923837
gg is gamergate which is when angry ugly women said video games are sexist so no more boobs allowed
>>71923561
This isn't even close to the first time this has been done with a movie. It's old hat. In fact, it's so old hat that it hasn't been attempted in a loong time. People were tried of it. Those people still are. Thing is, this world has a brand-new voting mass of people who care nothing for the past and see their time in it as the only one worth considering. I imagine a select few movie execs have been waiting for this moment for 20 years, hoping they didn't die before they could pull this one again. Bravo, at least they are students of history.
>>71923786
this and take your anti ghostkino threads back with you
>>71923837
You make some fair points. In a nutshell, gamer gate was this movement for ethics in video game journalism. The guys behind this movement uncovered some really shady and verifiable shit going on, including a concentrated effort by several publications to push a feminist agenda, which sounds really stupid, but the evidence was hard to refute (if you google into it, I won't go into detail).
Movement got labelled as "misogynistic" by the media, lost momentum, and nowadays lot of the remaining guys in the movement (or at least the ones that bother to post on their respective imageboards) are in fact douchebags. That is the short version, and don't be surprised if this post disappears. 4chan played a pretty major role in all this.
>>71923591
Is that really what you took from that? Perhaps in some cases, they're their own stumbling blocks? I'm saddened and dismayed. There still exists an older portion of the population who were born in a completely different time in terms of what was accepted, what made sense, etc. Some of those people are still in positions to make their beliefs a reality. They're going to die soon.
>>71923978
What the fuck is this mess
>>71923901
Don't give me that, I was raging with the rest of the weebs when Tokyo Mirage Sessions got censored to appease the SJWs. I just like to maintain some objectivity.
>>71919575
>feminists cry because we wont see their movie
>we are the ones crying.
Why do they project so hard bros?
>>71919575
> super liberal sites are paid to give feminist movie good review
Is this supposed to be news?
>>71923373
>pic related is an actual pig
heh
>>71924155
What's funny is that they're all so hilariously blatant about it. None of the negative reviews give a shit about the all-female nature of the cast, yet the positive reviews all have this "grrl power!" shit in their titles, as though liking the movie is a social statement.
Im really, REALLY tired of this purposely divisive, bottom feeder culture.
When will we move past this shit
>>71924155
>If they dont agree with me they are feminist!
Different sides of the same coin.
>>71924044
Seems like nobody even knows-knew- what it was about. There was so much confusion that it didn't really matter as long as you were part of the shit storm and having a laff. Exactly life this meaningless flap with this movie and the name-calling. That's all it is, name-calling and selling copy.
>>71924095
the redditors that have been spamming this trash flick here for the past few days
>>71922282
Before they're even president?
>>71922899
>>71922906
>>71924117
I remember articles telling people to buy an extra ticket to cancel out AVGN (or whiny piss baby as they called him).
>>71923955
>This isn't even close to the first time this has been done with a movie
Who said it was? Just quit taking the bait and it'll stop.
>>71924249
What is there to agree/disagree with about the Ghostbusters remake as movie? I called it a feminist movie because the movie is obviously feminist propaganda [pic related] and the director has publicly admitted it.
>>71924345
Unless they're going to somehow cancel out the profits he made on HIS OWN movie, I doubt he cares.
They're paid off and "fun and funny" is the best they could come up with.
Now that's fun and funny at the same time.
>>71924345
lulz you can't make someone be a martyr for or against if they're openly laughing their nerdy balls off at your stupidity.
>>71924363
Taking the bait, or taking the piss? I'm glad it's back, it's like the good old days, with internets!
>>71924342
Something's wrong on your end, retardo.
Besides, you can count up the critics yourself and do some simple math.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghostbusters_2016/reviews/?type=top_critics
>>71924382
> if i open my mouth wide open and show my teeth it looks like im having fun
fucking americans
Wouldn't Sony make more money if they didn't, you know, alienate half of their potential viewers? Or did some exec have his balls in a literal vicegrip by one of these lunatics?
What did he mean by this?
>>71924382
>meanwhile in Sanityville
>>71924382
The director is a cash-grab artist. You can't take anything he says as his honest opinion. He's a player in the business and he's found some traction with this.
>>71924516
i don't know, ishillforred82
read the rest of it
>>71923823
>D's are good grades
>>71924464
>a moderate dose of girl power that is unlikely to seem confrontational to anyone beyond the most confirmed basement-dwelling Gamergate troll.
Wow what a totally unbiased review
>>71924511
There are clearly some stupid people with too much on their plate at Sony. They'll ok though. The real powers that be will do even better as time goes by because of it. They want these silly fucks around.
>>71922741
>>71924342
>>71924464
How many critics will it take before the score stabilizes
How many reviews would you consider necessary to get an accurate scope of the score?
>>71922773
Where did you come from? Why are you here?
>>71924596
130-150. It could go up to 200.
>>71924596
We have a accurate scope of the score.
6/10
Between metacritic (59) and the All/Top Rotten Tomatoes reviews (6.6 and 6.2 respectively) it's quality is 6/10
The idea of reducing a movie review to a binary "like or hate" percentile has always been flawed
i don't know but the word "babymen" is hilarious
>>71922537
silencer, we already know that sony deleted every other comment. Please go lie somewhere else
>>71923892
Because it's THEIR film, don't you get it. It represents them. A stupid poop-joke comedy. Basically, it's like if men had a film that represented them, and it was Paul Blart: Mall Cop.
Why the fuck ARE they defending this movie?
>>71924667
it's just manchild, but you can only use manchild so many times, so they started saying that
>>71924596
The real bate is to be found within these ridiculous review aggregate sites. How many nothings does it take to get something? Enough is when you stop talking about it. Just enjoy the human comedy, it's way more entertaining than any movie coming out in the next five years. It's a cultural fad. Lot's of people still don't understand the true dynamics of human/internet culture. Laugh along with the guys who are making millions off of knowing this. Feels good man.
>>71923591
and we clearly need to erradicate them from earth
>>71924567
Who or what the fuck is red82 ?
>>71924667
Didn't you know twitter feminists can only speak in portmanteau?
For once I'd like them to invent a clever word/phrase
>>71924721
Don't include in me in that. Time will do it soon enough. One of those old asshats is prolly my grandpa, and that old bastard still knows how to get a sammich made.
>>71924792
Can we at least revoke their voting rights?
>>71924792
but educating them is not our job and mansplaining is wrong.
So genocide is the only answer, taking away their jobs and making it ilegal for them to go online is not enough
if you dont agree with me you are no feminist, just one a stupid bitch that hates having the right to vote and should offer your body to servitude
>>71924737
dickwomen
>>71924679
>Why the fuck ARE they defending this movie?
Because they know if it isn't a smash hit studios will be hesitant to release more movies with female protagonists in the future
To them this movie either means more fem-comedies, women action heroes, and diversity in media or another 10-15 years of safe white/male protagonists that dont interest them but will make money
what a petty social diversion
no one of any great thought would waste his time with such a trivial squabble.
>>71924909
do you think anyone of great thought would post in a thread about it?
or does that not count as wasting time?
Aren't all men in the film protrayed as morans or incompetent or evil in the new film? Even the only male lead is stupid, but turns out to be the only likeable character.
>>71919575
>>71924844
>>71924853
You guys are hilarious! I sincerely fine you two(one) funny. Time takes a man's rights away, not another man, or woman. You can't take a right away. If voting were a privilege, sure. Take it away! I'd be afraid of waking up and losing it because I didn't like eating meat tomorrow though.
>>71924950
According to a lot of reviews yes, I won't be paying to find out
Even if it's not true the movie doesn't seem interesting or good
>>71923561
It wouldn't work looking at the whole Rolfe thing. James got a media blitzkrieg for a mild "Nah, not seeing it" and pulling dipshit youtube comments for controversy.
They're the ones that turned this mess into a political event and banged the "This is our time, sisters! Support this movie now! For Feminist!" drum.
>>71924866
Thing is, I'm not even opposed to an all-female Ghostbusters, if it was done right. Not as a sleazy, agenda-pushing gimmick.
>>71919575
does anyone find this whole altercation fucking depressing as shit for humanity?
they're literally troll movies at this point, it's pathetic. no matter what side you're on, this is pathetic.
>>71922800
Can you tell from the pixels and having seen a few shops in your time?
>>71924973
Shut up you menenist cunt or I will send my army of followers to destroy you
Your options tight now
[ ]Shut up
[ ]Agree with me
>>71922117
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TmNy5SPcj8
>>71924948
Nobody here is posting because they think of themselves as great thinkers. If there are, and I openly hope there is, they are the butt of a big old 4chan style lulz.
>>71925000
>they literally could have used the all female GB team from the cartoons
>or invented their own all female team
>anything to keep it in the same universe
>but Feig didn't want them using technology that was created entirely by a WHITE MALE so he decided to reboot it and piss off fans
>>71925006
This all needs to come crashing down, for real.
We need to reset
>>71925042
stop it! I wish my pee hole sphincter was that tight I think I peed a little.
>>71920643
He is right
Women just make stuff at this point to complain about (ex: video games)
>>71924596
>6/10
they hated it but didn't want to say it was bad because they spend months defending it from random guys who thought the trailer looked bad.
>>71925113
APOLOGIZE RIGHT NOW
So apparently you can get away with making a dumb movie by calling the people who criticize it sexist even if they said nothing about gender
>>71925053
Well I'm not voting for Trump, and at least Hilary won't fuck up the FCC's newfound internet regulating powers so... meh.
>>71925183
Yes, actually, that is a pretty accurate summary of the situation.
Why do women think infantilization offends us in any way? Is it the worst thing they can think of, since women are all children on a fundamental level?
Claiming we have small dicks would get through to us better.
>>71925182
I'm sor.. wait, just how big is your army?
>>71925222
"Manchildren" is used to describe men who behave like children
There is no such word for women, because they behave like children until they die
>>71925183
Spot on.
>>71925222
Women are children and they think men have small dicks. So, does that mean you like fucking children with a small dick?
>>71925222
>Claiming we have small dicks would get through to us better.
They assume that you don't need to be reminded how small your penis is
>>71919575
It's always amusing to me that feminists represent their enemy as a fat neck beard with glasses and bad hair
AKA the typical man that supports feminism
/tv/ called this shit years ago.
>>71925342
Dont anti feminist depict their enemy as a fat sjw with glasses and bad hair?
>>71925355
>years ago
>less than 3 months
really?
you have a bunch of people in a thread spouting out numbers
1 of them is going to be right
>>71925236
Bitch do you know who I am? I'm a Jewish black trans-lesbian with over 200 Twitter handles and 10000 followers. I have the system admin in the phone and he is tweeting your name and address as we speak, expect the visit of 10000 angry lgbt youth, the campus police, over 50 feminist organization, the black panthers, Hillary Clintons cabinet, a small militia of Muslim kamikaze warriors, the FBI and the nsa, every radical un representatives, the eus secret army and some very angry butch lesbians in the next twenty minutes. That's right, we are declaring your property a safe space and removing hate speech from it, we have authorization from Obama to use lethal force, you will die 100 times before you hit the floor in which point Allah will be waiting you in hell where muhhad will stone you for eternity
>>71925476
>1 of them is going to be right
But the majority of the people guessed it right, that the new ghostbusters would receive high RT score because of "muh" feminism.
>>71925535
no only 1 person was right
>>71925433
Some citation my be needed here. A feminist, like, a real one, is logical, reasonable, doesn't think Halloween occurs every day, and can engage in thoughtful, constructive discussion with anybody, and seeing no particular value in getting into screaming matches with trolls, modern style or otherwise. You also never see one these days, unless you're very lucky. They're keeping their heads down.
>>71925355
>>71925535
It's not exactly a hard guess that the people shilling clickbait articles for Ghostbusters months in advance would keep marching in lockstep to praise it as an unrecognized masterpiece. You can't be surprised that propaganda shills managed to keep their story straight for 6 months.
Nothing really worth giving a fuck about until we get some nice ticket numbers.
>>71925476
>dec 2015
>3 months ago
That damage control though.
>>71925575
As do most people with moderate viewpoints that they actually thought out, instead of joining out of an insipid desire to be "part of something."
>>71925490
Sounds like my kinda town. Key word- town. Real small, up-state Canada. People in my provincial capital don't even know where I'm from when I take the wheat stock outta my mouth and tell them. Obama? I've heard of that guy. Isn't he running for President soon?
>>71925575
Feminist is Machiavellian both the ruler and the radical extremist force are real feminists
>>71925646
Keck we will erase you from history kid, I eat
Pizzas bigger than you for breakfast, Canada? You wouldn't be safe from me in China
I will reduce you to the size of a micro aggression
>>71925640
>instead of joining out of an insipid desire to be "part of something
Uhh, did you just paint a clear-but not complete- picture of SJWism? There may be scouts here, scouts with really pointy tumblr/andor twitter accounts. I'd be lubing up my laugh track if I were you.
>>71925679
Machiavelli is rolling in his grave with his six wives right now...
>>71925736
Heyy, my aggression was pretty micro- if you know what I mean, wink wink.
/thread/? /thread/? let it go out, like a candle in the wind.......
>>71926008
>>71919575
How come there isn't a pull quote from the Variety review?
>>71923720
4chan has changed a lot. I'm thinking of burning my guy fawkes mask.
>>71919946
Strawmanning.
>>71920724
>noooo
>>71920824
>>71924737
so basically the tumblr equivalent of cuck or beta here.
>definative
TIME to die.
>>71925195
Wait, you support that FCC vote?
Fuck man, I don't like Trump or Shillary, but the gubmint getting (even more) involved in the last frontier of true free expression is just bad.
Fuck, the Supreme Court grounds have a no-protected free speech zone.
>>71926914
4chan always wanted you to
>>71927205
I'm hoping that's the fault of the person who made the graphic and wasn't actually printed in Time.
>>71919575
I wonder if anyone ever pointed out that the bottom right quote is sexist, since it implies that women are vapid and driven by fashion alone?
>>71922029
Click is shit and it's only seen as "good" by the kind of people that unironically watch Sandler movies and think him showing any emotion that isn't apathy or anger is groundbreaking.
>>71919575
Never forget that in the leaked Sony emails, they had plans to litigate against Bill Murray if he wouldn't promote the film.
>>71919575
The New York Times review really grosses me out
