Post: #226

I swear, this is at least 10x funnier if you read it in Morgan Freeman's voice.

(03-04-2016 01:11 AM)Scesci Wrote:  

Post: #227

The international trailer managed to fix one mistake in the first trailer that had been repeatedly pointed out that they weren't 4 scientists as Winston was just a regular guy. They also tried to tone down the ghetto originals of the black chick.

Somehow they made it even worse.

Showing more Chris Hemsworth. Why? We don't hate the trailer because it's full of chicks. We hate stupid watered down remakes. Let's hope the reshoots they are doing still ensure this bombs like it should and maybe this remake trend will crawl off into the corner and die.

Post: #228

^
Considering Hellywood complains so much about piracy & loss of revenue; you'd think they'd learn that trite reboots / remakes (esp. to the sum of $154mil) are not the wise option.
As opposed to new & genuinely creative properties.
Seems Hellywood wants to continue head-butting that brick wall...

Post: #229

(03-13-2016 04:20 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  ^
Considering Hellywood complains so much about piracy & loss of revenue; you'd think they'd learn that trite reboots / remakes (esp. to the sum of $154mil) are not the wise option.
As opposed to new & genuinely creative properties.
Seems Hellywood wants to continue head-butting that brick wall...

So, if the black chick doesn't get a Oscar nom next year, how many more will boycott the ceremony?

Post: #230

I wonder who's actually going to watch this crap.

I predict it will bomb worse than Fan4stic did.

Post: #231

So Tuth found himself in this movie and got trapped in the ghost realm?

Post: #232

(03-13-2016 04:27 PM)EDantes Wrote:  I wonder who's actually going to watch this crap.

I predict it will bomb worse than Fan4stic did.

As it has a U.S. summer release date & it sounds stupid enough for kids to enjoy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing campaign shifts towards trying to 'capture' a new generation of kids.
Those who aren't familiar with the original nor are they all that cynical.
There's a whole line of toys to sell after-all.

Post: #233

Marshmallow Man Reacts to GHOSTBUSTERS Trailer

Post: #234

(03-13-2016 05:29 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 04:27 PM)EDantes Wrote:  I wonder who's actually going to watch this crap.

I predict it will bomb worse than Fan4stic did.

As it has a U.S. summer release date & it sounds stupid enough for kids to enjoy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing campaign shifts towards trying to 'capture' a new generation of kids.
Those who aren't familiar with the original nor are they all that cynical.
There's a whole line of toys to sell after-all.

I think there will be a big push on social media by SJW's, feminists, lefties, feel the Bern supporters and other scum to go see this movie. They will make this a fight against patriarchy and misogyny.

We will see "go ghost gurl" memes, "Ghostbusters in any size" t-shirts and other shit in our FB feeds all summer. Cant wait.

Post: #235

(03-13-2016 05:29 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  As it has a U.S. summer release date & it sounds stupid enough for kids to enjoy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing campaign shifts towards trying to 'capture' a new generation of kids.
Those who aren't familiar with the original nor are they all that cynical.
There's a whole line of toys to sell after-all.

Boys aged 3 to 10 do not want to play with toy figures of female characters no matter how "bad ass" they may be portrayed.
Never have and never will.
I doubt little girls will want to play with these toy figures either.

If they really think kids will ask their parents to buy toys based on this shit film, they are in for a huge bankrupting surprise.

Post: #236

Sony, take note....here is how you do an all female Ghostbusters trailer:





Funnier scenes, better dialogue, sexier girls, and far, far better acting
Gotta hand it to these amateur lizards - in terms of a silly chick flick paying homage to a classic movie - they fucking nailed it.


oh - before I forget...
WB female Venkman and female Spengler

Post: #237

Haha wrong thread, my bad.

Post: #238

The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

Post: #239

(03-14-2016 07:46 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 05:29 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  As it has a U.S. summer release date & it sounds stupid enough for kids to enjoy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing campaign shifts towards trying to 'capture' a new generation of kids.
Those who aren't familiar with the original nor are they all that cynical.
There's a whole line of toys to sell after-all.

Boys aged 3 to 10 do not want to play with toy figures of female characters no matter how "bad ass" they may be portrayed.
Never have and never will.
I doubt little girls will want to play with these toy figures either.

If they really think kids will ask their parents to buy toys based on this shit film, they are in for a huge bankrupting surprise.

All the ghostbusters toys fit in ecto-1, I have a feeling the new ecto1 won't be worth the cost of manufacturing to fit these new ghostbusters in. Or it'll have to be priced so high that nobobdy could afford the complete set, due to amount of materials needed.

Post: #240

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

Bear in mind the hack of Sony's e-mails available on Wikileaks suggests very strongly that Sony was threatening to sue Murray if he refused to get on board with their reboot ideas. I could understand it if he negotiated a cameo as the price of his artistic integrity, at least he hasn't got a substantial part in the film.

It would not surprise me if they were all so threatened. Even Ernie Hudson is said to have a cameo in this film, and he's publicly questioned the whole idea of the reboot.

That aside, Dan Aykroyd is just fucking tinfoil hat insane, as well as being utterly incapable of recognising a shit script when he sees one. Also see: Ghostbusters 2, Blues Brothers 2000, Spies Like Us, Pearl Harbor, Pixels, etc, etc, etc...

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #241

(03-14-2016 04:22 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 07:46 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(03-13-2016 05:29 PM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:  As it has a U.S. summer release date & it sounds stupid enough for kids to enjoy.
I wouldn't be surprised if the marketing campaign shifts towards trying to 'capture' a new generation of kids.
Those who aren't familiar with the original nor are they all that cynical.
There's a whole line of toys to sell after-all.

Boys aged 3 to 10 do not want to play with toy figures of female characters no matter how "bad ass" they may be portrayed.
Never have and never will.
I doubt little girls will want to play with these toy figures either.

If they really think kids will ask their parents to buy toys based on this shit film, they are in for a huge bankrupting surprise.

All the ghostbusters toys fit in ecto-1, I have a feeling the new ecto1 won't be worth the cost of manufacturing to fit these new ghostbusters in. Or it'll have to be priced so high that nobobdy could afford the complete set, due to amount of materials needed.

Agreed, they'll have to fit extra suspension. Kids, be careful not to put Melissa McCarthy and Leslie Jones on the same side of the car or it'll roll over in corners.

Post: #242

(03-14-2016 05:04 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  That aside, Dan Aykroyd is just fucking tinfoil hat insane, as well as being utterly incapable of recognising a shit script when he sees one. Also see: Ghostbusters 2, Blues Brothers 2000, Spies Like Us, Pearl Harbor, Pixels, etc, etc, etc...

No love for Spies Like Us? I always thought it was greatness. Mainly because of Chevy though. But Dan Akyroyd wasn't bad back then.

Post: #243

^^^^

Good sir, I concede the point in view of your posting hot Russian tottie.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #244

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

Well Aykroyd is a hack who will attach his name to any piece of shit as long as he gets his ends, and going off what I've heard, Sony extorted Murray with the threat of a huge lawsuit if he didn't appear? Harold Ramis is the only one who was smart about it.

The movie's budget is 154 mil before things like promotion and advertising - let's assume another 50 mil there. In order to not be a bomb it should have to double it's money. I wouldn't bet on those odds. I'd say 'never overestimate the taste of the Chinese', but even them I don't see turning out in huge numbers to see a 'comedy' about four women fighting ghosts.

If the reboot was in the vein of a more gritty reboot (like Nolan's Batman trilogy) I could jump on board...who was drinking their lunch on the day 'let's reboot Ghostbusters, only with a female cast and ghost effects out of a shitty 80's music video!' got greenlit?

The Original holds too much nostalgia for me to see it shit on - WNSEEFFWAHCWWFMA (would not see even if for free with a hot chick who would fuck me afterwards).

Post: #245

(03-14-2016 08:37 PM)Nonpareil Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

Well Aykroyd is a hack who will attach his name to any piece of shit as long as he gets his ends, and going off what I've heard, Sony extorted Murray with the threat of a huge lawsuit if he didn't appear? Harold Ramis is the only one who was smart about it.

Post: #246

(03-14-2016 05:04 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

Bear in mind the hack of Sony's e-mails available on Wikileaks suggests very strongly that Sony was threatening to sue Murray if he refused to get on board with their reboot ideas. I could understand it if he negotiated a cameo as the price of his artistic integrity, at least he hasn't got a substantial part in the film.

Me initially being skeptical of Bill Murray but then accepting the Wikileaks excuse:

Post: #247

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

(03-14-2016 05:04 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  Bear in mind the hack of Sony's e-mails available on Wikileaks suggests very strongly that Sony was threatening to sue Murray if he refused to get on board with their reboot ideas. I could understand it if he negotiated a cameo as the price of his artistic integrity, at least he hasn't got a substantial part in the film.

It would not surprise me if they were all so threatened. Even Ernie Hudson is said to have a cameo in this film, and he's publicly questioned the whole idea of the reboot.

How can you threaten to sue someone if they don't support your film or cameo in your movie if you have nothing to do with that film ?
I have never heard of such a thing.
I can't imagine any of the original cast signing a contract in 1984 or 1989 stating they must support all Ghostbuster related media for the rest of their lives.
How exactly does this work ?

...and what about Rick Moranis ?
How did he get out of this ?

Post: #248

(03-15-2016 07:37 AM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(03-14-2016 03:58 PM)RIslander Wrote:  The fact that they're making this shitty movie doesn't bother me. The fact that Aykroyd and Murray are in it pisses me off. Those fucking traitors.

(03-14-2016 05:04 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  Bear in mind the hack of Sony's e-mails available on Wikileaks suggests very strongly that Sony was threatening to sue Murray if he refused to get on board with their reboot ideas. I could understand it if he negotiated a cameo as the price of his artistic integrity, at least he hasn't got a substantial part in the film.

It would not surprise me if they were all so threatened. Even Ernie Hudson is said to have a cameo in this film, and he's publicly questioned the whole idea of the reboot.

How can you threaten to sue someone if they don't support your film or cameo in your movie if you have nothing to do with that film ?
I have never heard of such a thing.
I can't imagine any of the original cast signing a contract in 1984 or 1989 stating they must support all Ghostbuster related media for the rest of their lives.
How exactly does this work ?

...and what about Rick Moranis ?
How did he get out of this ?

It may not necessarily be a contract of support. Ackroyd dropped some knowledge about the way the Ghostbusters franchise was structured back in a 2012 interview with Esquire:

Quote:Well, I have one-fifth of the voice, along with the partners and the other owner of the property, the picture company, and Ivan, Billy [Murray], and myself, and Harold [Ramis]. We all have to sign off on it unanimously — uh, I'm not sure Billy does anymore, since he abrogated his rights by sort of, by saying, two years ago he said, ‘I don't want to be involved,’ and the picture company I think had some clause in there that if he actually passed on the third of fourth offer, he no longer has a view of the franchise. So, that's for the lawyers to decide."

(Source of the quote: http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Sony-Migh...68651.html )

The Sony e-mails don't say how they planned to sue Murray, only that if Bill refused to get on board aggressive litigation counsel should be engaged to go through the options. Assuming -- and it's a big assumption -- that Murray still does have a stake in the franchise, there might be some grounds to sue him on some sort of argument that he's damaging the IP by unreasonably refusing an attempt to keep it up and running or something.

And I have to admit Ernie Hudson's appearance as a cameo (if true) despite his vocal criticism of the concept is probably best explained by Winston Zeddemore's first line: "If there's a steady paycheck in it, I'll believe anything you say."

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #249

Quote:Harold Ramis is the only one who was smart about it.

Post: #250

Encyclopedia Dramatica has a new article on Fembusters:

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Fembusters