Is this really as bad as everyone is saying it it is or is it

>>86156368
It's not a great movie, but neither was most comedies that came out that year.

>>86156368
>RT gave it a 73% and I trust them because they're not a bunch of angry manchildren.

so what the fuck are you doing here then, you self-important sack of shit?

>Is this really as bad as everyone is saying it it is

No. It's worse.

>>86156454
Is this board still assblasted over BvS being rightfully trashed?

>anon is curious about a movie but instead of just spending 2 hours watching it he makes a thread
If it's a book, a long tv show, a video game or anything else that will take over 10 hours then I'd understand it. Watch it if you want to and make up your own mind. From what I've seen I'm not interested in seeing it, you obviously are interested and should therefore watch it.

>>86156368
If it were an original concept it would be an inoffensive movie. People hated it because it had nothing to do with ghostbusters and was incredibly average. It's like putting a Mercedes hood ornament on your kia. It just highlights how shitty your vehicle is.

>>86156368
I thought the dislike for this movie was about the female main characters and give it a chance the other day, and objetively, this was boring and a waste of time

>>86156368

Ghostbusters 3 would not have been made in todays cesspool, it would have been made about 20 years ago or so.

Bill Murray holding out on GB3 artificially inflated the perceived value of a third ghostbusters movie, instead of a shitty sequel what fans got was "we're still working on it" for 20 years straight and then this pile of crap. Even people who don't actually care about Ghostbusters had heard of how difficult it was getting a third ghostbusters movie off the ground and so became interested in it for that reason alone. If Murray had either firmly put his foot down publicly or just fucking gone along and did his best with a third movie there would have been no value in Sony creating the new one and therefore it wouldn't have been made.

Now - we can argue all day about whether GB3 would have been good but it definitely would have been better than GB2k16

>>86156543
Sounds like reasonable advice
Not op, but thanks for the insight

>>86156784
Its only been two days and yet we have copypasta already.

>>86156368
Movie is no more offensive than your typical pointless eighties remake.

But yeah, if they are going to go out of their way to insult their customers, of course the movie is going to bomb.

It's crap and insulting the original doesn't make it any better, OP.

>>86156368
It's terrible.

>>86156368
Ghostbusterettes was the funniest film of the last 10 years.

>>86156368
It was a failure. They're not making any more.

>>86156368
It's not like the worst thing ever made, but it's not good and not worth seeing. The two biggest issues I had with it were:
1) It's just not funny. I think there were maybe two moments that I genuinely found funny, and to my astonishment the black woman ended up being the only decent one of the cast.
2) It's terribly edited/put together. It actually looks like they just slapped it all without paying much mind to the film as a whole, and as a result sequences/scenes don't really mesh well with each other. Additionally, many of the film's jokes suffer (or rather made worse) from poor editing choices as well.

IMO 73% is way too high for it as a measure of the film's overall quality (remember though RT scores are just a percentage of the aggregated reviews based on whether they "liked" or "disliked" it). More realistically this should have a 30-45% score or 3-4 out of ten.

>>86156368
>So what's the objective verdict?

So bad it lost millions of dollars, directly caused the cancellation of a sequel, and caused a studio to cancel a shared universe idea.

Objectively, motherfucker.

File: Ghostbusters 1466209400339f.jpg (245KB, 1296x704px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1296x704px

>be Paul Feig an unsuccessful actor with a terrible last name
>get fired from your biggest television role you've ever had as the JUST teacher on Sabrina the Teen Witch
>the show you pitched about how you were a loser in high school gets greenlighted, but the network hates it so Freaks and Geeks is cancelled after 10 episodes, and only hipsters remember it
>try to be film director, but no one watches your shitty comedies
>after The Hangover becomes a big success you pitch your gender swapped female version of it called Bridesmaids, and Hollywood throws you a bone
>become success overnight because normie Amerifats identify with fattie McCarthy, and you start showing up to film sets with tacky faggy suits to stand out
>ride the McCarthy train by cranking out shitty "female interest" raunchy comedies because it's the thing that made you
>happily help Sony feminist Amy Pascal fuck over Ivan Reitman's beloved 80's classic film Ghostbuster by remaking it into something that will piss off the core Ghostbusters fan base because who needs their money?
>troll fans on Twitter, and use online SJW's as your personal army against anyone who says the trailer looks like shit
>online SJW feminist reviewers inflate Rotten Tomatoes scores of your shitty film, but despite that no one sees your POS cash grab, and it bombs
>Paul Feig will never direct another 150 million plus film in Hollywood again

File: 1493582661881.jpg (89KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1280x720px

>>86156368
It's a fact that progressive films get inflated ratings on rotten tomatoes. The middle one is actually the rotten tomatoes editor in chief. There was a macro circulating with all her tweets shilling the film, someone here might have it.

>>86158060
I just want you to know this made me smile

Which was worse, Fembusters or the Prequel Trilogy?

I'd say the former seeing at least the latter had some potential in it.

>>86158060
Holy fuck I didn't realize he was that teacher from sabrina

>>86156417
You make a fair point, but calling it "not a great movie" is still a bit of an understatement.

>>86156368
It's bad, but not for the reasons people expect

You TOTALLY can do an all female ghost buster, you absolutely can. It's not hard. You also got the original cast on board to do cameos and be involved and shit. You also have, genuinely, some of the best, funny women in comedy in this movie. It's a massive recipe for success.

Except the director. The director, Paul Feig, used this as a feminist platform to spread a message - not spread a good movie. This is a director who has literally written an article about how men are not funny.

There is a simple indicator for success in Hollywood reboots - do they pay tribute to the source material? Almost every reboot that has rebooted a franchise being aware it is a franchise, has fans and some sort of "mythos" you have to pay respect to ALWAYS do well. Reboots that are soulless rarely do well.

Ghostbusters has no soul. It's worth a watch if you change to a channel on the TV and it's already on, but since none of us have cable packages anymore that's not happening