JUST

>>82168623
deserved it

>>82168623
>there are people that get paid millions of dollars to crash a division with no survivors
Really makes my almonds go for a jog.

>>82168623
Did they pull this article? Why can't I find it on their site.

>>82168767
Just google sony pictures

So this is the power of making progressive casting decision

>all the top people are jews
>still lose money

>>82169128
719 million dollars is a small price to pay for all the benefits of diversity though.

The conspiracy theory that Sony's execs are all plants, with the mission to bankrupt the company, gains constantly more credibility.

>>82169392
I can imagine that was an argument Feig tried to make.
Maybe not out loud, but rehearsing shit in his head before a meeting.

File: photo (4).jpg (70KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 900x900px

>>82168623
Ghostbusters (2016) was an absolutely kino masterpiece!
10 gold stars!

>>82168623
justice

hopefully they took the hint

Not really because of SJWs. It's because they don't have the MCU or Star Wars, the only shit that sells today.

>Catering to SJWs
This is what they get.

>>82169833
lmao fuck off amy

try making good movies for a change

File: bobby d laughing.gif (2MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x225px

>>82169597
>shit in his head

>>82169871
Not really necessary for maximizing revenue, might even be a drawback. Just look at series like Marvel, Star Wars, and Transformers.

>>82169833
Well every trailer or promo being incredibly unfunny probably didn't do it any favors in a way that transcends SJW bullshit, but the whole time leading up to the movie basically felt like it was trying to trick people into watching it so they could feel like they won an internet argument with a "sexist"

Sony deserves it. They have become worse than Microsoft.

>>82169833
> not really because of sjws
> Sony’s ‘Ghostbusters’ Loss Likely to Come to About $50 Million, Sources Say

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-loss-sony-50-million-1201834911/

>>82169871
SJW movies do fine financially if the right studio owns and the right perosn makes them

See TFA and Get Out

File: NbJtvEU.png (306KB, 720x854px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 720x854px

>>82168623
Oh no, but how will SJW stick it to the patriarchy???

>>82170021
>I DONT KNOW IF IT WAS A RACE THING BUT I'M MAD AS HELL

um, no bitch. people dont want a 6 foot 3 250lbs women jumping on them

>>82169833

>144 million dollar budget.
>Catering to a demographic that blogs about movies but never goes to the theater and/or aren't enough in the world for it to be profitable.
>Reboot/Remake of a cult classic without any of the original cast or characters, rather putting them in drop off cameo roles.
>Vast majority of people hated the trailers, didn't like the direction they were taking and just generally alienating the core fan base that would have seen the movie.
>The movie itself was pure trash that didn't have what made the original great which was the interaction of the cast with each other in this extraordinary situation.

If it would have been a smaller budget movie, with some of the cast coming back and having a solid script it would have done just fine. That is also a problem with Sony wanting to make franchises and trying to copy the Marvel model. Who knows how much time and money they wasted trying to set up their supposed "Ghostbusters Shared Universe".

>>82168623
>Make a reboot of a beloved franchise
>But not really since the Ghostbusters existed in the past in this reboot
>Bring back the old actors
>But don't have them reprise their roles and have them play basically bit characters
>Make the new cast all female
>But make them all bland, uninteresting or abrasive
>Try to promote your 'reboot' with reviews
>Have reviewers mock naysayers of the movie by literally calling them dumb men intimidated by women
I never did see the fallout from the directors/actors on that hot piece of garbage. Would have loved to see them defend that massive flop that NOT ONLY didn't make money but drug down the rest of their film division in the process.

Anyone have that screenshot of the reviewer that was being super insulting and juvenile basically going 'hurr durr men no like women taking their place', it was amazing to see something like that get published seriously.

>>82170084
>Article about destroying the patriarchy
>Lead photo is a woman licking a phallic symbol

>>82170084
>Destroyed patriarchy 5 times
>Came back 5 times
Patriarchy confirmed immortal and invincible.

>>82170069
TFA wasn't full blown SJW
>but muh characters of different colors and gender
Ya fine whatever but they weren't shoving that message down your throat every second, they just did it from a pure cosmetic POV

>>82169326
Jesus. I wonder what happened to the Jews that fail to rake money. Will they be ostracised?

>>82169857
Also not being creative and just rehashing older films.

>>82170330
Have to agree, while Ray or whatever the girl's name is, was a typical stronk womyn Mary Sue, I chalk it more up to shit writing than trying to empower women.
Especially since the film ends with her needing training from a white man (holy fuck, what year is it???)

>>82169833
>Not really because of SJWs.

>bitches, niggers, numales, and faggots in damn near every lead role

Yea, fuck off.

>>82170069
>TFA
>SJW
What?

>>82168623

The Dark Tower is about to bomb too.

It's a shame. I really wanted to see the Amy Schumer Barbie bomb as well and watch them blame Russiam Hackers.

But they cancelled it.

>>82169392

Here's what's interesting...

They fired the unbelievably incompetent and ideologically driven Amy Pascal.

They then brought in Tom Fucking Rothman. The guy who almost destroyed Fox's X-Men money cow and spent his entire last few years at Fox fighting tooth and nail to prevent a Deadpool movie.

They literally hired a fucking poisonous incompentent failure to take over from Pascal...

Very suspicious. Or retarded.

File: Untitled-1.jpg (442KB, 1200x600px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 1200x600px

>>82170581

>>82168623
Sink already you satanic fucks.

File: IMG_8469.jpg (76KB, 562x539px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 562x539px

You would think Hollywood would be totally cut throat that if you fucked up one time you'd never work again

Yet evidently you can constantly fuck up and no one cares

>>82169833

Catering to SJW's contributes to their overall main problem - making fucking awful movies.

Disney caters to SJW's but they have competent movies + properties.

If Sony had done less SJW catering and more competent filmmaking they could have had a huge franchise relaunch on their hands with Ghostbusters.

>>82170957
So long as you're pushing (((their))) narrative you get a free pass. These guys are even churning out interracial porn at a loss.

>>82169392
Exactly.

Sure they bankrupted their company, but think about the LEGACY they now have of being the first movie company to feature a woman in any role in a motion picture.

That's HISTORIC.

>>82170396
(((they))) made plenty. The Jap owned company hasn't learned their ways.

but when they've crashed the plane with no survivors, you can bet some friendly Chosen will swoop in to buy it up at a discount

see: Disney in the 80s

>be playstation in japan
>work hard as fuck to make good console and good games
>get shitshattered by fucking women in the movie division ruining your promotion

>>82170957
Hollyjewd is more about nepotism than the other shit.

>>82170957
Losing a lot of investor money is a bad thing, and it makes investors not like you or your company, which might make your company not like you for straining their relationship with the money men, but the money men can't directly order you to be fired or anything because they're not your employers.

File: 10403955_1934113406813225_6073288777188763275_o.jpg (60KB, 720x490px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 720x490px

>>82170660
Why do you think the protagonists were a nigger and a woman?

719 million? Is this some sort of accounting trick? What did they put out last year that could have lost so much money?