Especially if they haven't seen it? Critics have been more positive than negative, and even acknowledge it will never top the original, but people still seem stuck on the notion of trashing it without seeing it. And accusing those who like it of being studio plants. Can you explain that logic? Because I don't get it. If you hate the film, you're justified? But if you like it, you're wrong? Hmm.
>>71923421
Reboots just need to stop, OP. Once Hollyweird does that people will be happier.
You must be out of your mind if you think it's normal to like such mediocre comedies.
I can't understand how anyone would pay to watch any "Ghostbusters".
Congratulations to the marketing team, I guess, since apparently lots of American people now care about being opinionated about it...
Reboots are pretty fucking pathetic. Make a good movie, outright.
>>71923421
>People like the originals, and don't want to see them tarnished with an awful entry in the franchise
>Trailers look bad, humour is very broad and childish
>Casting isn't great
>People are fed up of cash-grab remakes
>Cast and crew said in the run-up to its release that people who didn't acknowledge it as a comedic masterpiece were basically worse than Hitler, making people root for it to fail
>It is unconscionable to pretend to ally yourself with feminism when you're actually treating the entire movement as nothing more than a money-teat for your selfish corporatist desires
>using innocent young girls to promote an agenda
Because Ghostbusters started hating them first
What started as "Oh great, another reboot no one wanted" was met with vitriol and accusations of sexism and racism and whatever other isms you can think of and telling people that they were fundamentally shitty people with no redeeming value because they weren't interested in yet another needless rehash
>>71923421
Honestly? I didn't care until they basically said that anyone who doesn't want to see it is a misogynistic manbaby, that's when I hoped it would flop.
stop responding to the mazouzposter you fucking retards
>>71923721
>using pictures of smiling girls as proof
>>71923421
>reboot announced
>fans upset because it means the death of GB3 (which Akroyd kept teasing for years)
>trailer releases
>it's terrible
>huge backlash from the production team and cast
>if you don't like it you're just sexist
>James Rolfe decides the controversy isn't worth it. Announces to his fans he won't be reviewing it because he knows he's biased against it for not being GB3
>media tears him apart
>everyone who didn't care now wants it to fail because of all the accusations of misogyny
And as for "studio plants" Sony has been convicted of writing fake reviews and it's not a secret they astroturf on youtube/other sites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manning_(fictitious_writer)
http://furiousfanboys.com/2016/07/sony-may-produced-positive-ghostbusters-review-youtube/
And then there's the matter of many of the positive reviews being written by people who wrote opinion articles attacking Rolfe, claiming that it was sexist to dislike the new movie, or defended it adamantly on twitter. So their bias is painfully obvious and they decided to like it long before seeing it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/4s6of5/ghostbusters_2016_review_megathread/d573ypg
Personally I never really liked the original. It wasn't my "childhood movie" like it was for some people who are probably too old to still be on 4chan. I couldn't care less about the new movie. I like that it has 4 female stars and I love how much it pisses you people off. Probably not going to see it unless my gf drags me.
>>71923721
You or whoever made that image is an idiot.
I definitely plan on watching it, just not while it's in theaters.
>>71924491
>I never really liked the original
I'm actually with you. It was ok, but that's about it. I can't even make myself extrapolate on this point, I just feel very neutral about it as a movie. As a franchise, it's mostly bad.
>>71924522
t. Hitlerina
>>71924522
>propaganda is bad only if Nazis do it
>>71924751
Who is creating the "pro-Ghostbusters" propaganda? Are you saying it's a vast conspiracy by the SJWs and not just a little girl who is excited to meet a movie star?
>>71924522
Hi JIDF!
>>71924789
Well first of all Sony marketing set up that photoshoot. They made the costumes for those two girls and photographed them with Wiig.
Those two girls can't possibly like ghostbusters enough to dress up as them because they hadn't seen the movie yet (this is literally the premier) and they're too young to see the movie anyway (PG13)
How on earth does that picture not scream "marketing" to you?
Other way around. People are predetermined to defend the movies.
In most cases, like when Total Recall or Robocop trailers came out, people just say this looks like shit and move on.
With Ghostbusters though people were actively attacked with a twisted narrative through ideologues, mostly for marketing purposes I'd assume.
>>71923421
DUMB PEDO AUTIST WHO POSTS UNRELATED IMAGES OF THAT JEW FROM GOTHAM AS OP
KILL YOURSELF FAGGOT
I WISH I CARED ENOUGH TO SAVE ALL YOUR FUCKING AUTISTIC OP POSTS OF THIS FUCKING KID WHILE YOU POST UNRELATED TOPICS
It looks awful.
