Main Menu

Is this It For Ghostbusters Two....

Started by ThryllSeekyr, 19 February, 2016, 10:02:43 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Stan

I'd rather eat a bullet than watch another Feig/McCarthy team up (without Statham to make it sorta worthwhile) but I am intrigued to see what happens at the box office. That $154m budget is pretty hefty for a guy whose most heavily praised film couldn't quite take in $300m. On the face of it though, £300m seems like a realistic target even with all the negativity. I'm not expecting a Fantastic Four type disaster regardless of a few similarities in the whole build up to this.

Hawkmumbler

Sadly i'd say internet mob mentality may well have already killed the movies potential profit marginby alienating more than a few casual viewers. Thanks, mysogyny.

JOE SOAP

#122
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2016, 12:25:22 PM
Sadly i'd say internet mob mentality may well have already killed the movies potential profit marginby alienating more than a few casual viewers. Thanks, mysogyny.

Whether the film is good or not and the axe swing of reviews will determine its success with the general audience - not a few blokes on the Internet with frustrated hard-ons and man-crushes for Bill Murray.




Hawkmumbler

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2016, 12:44:55 PM
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2016, 12:25:22 PM
Sadly i'd say internet mob mentality may well have already killed the movies potential profit marginby alienating more than a few casual viewers. Thanks, mysogyny.

Whether the film is good or not and the axe swing of reviews will determine its success with the general audience - not a few blokes on the Internet with frustrated hard-ons and man-crushes for Bill Murray.
One would hope but i'm not going to get my hopes up about revenue.

JOE SOAP

#124
Quote from: Hawkmumbler on 26 May, 2016, 01:00:10 PM
One would hope but i'm not going to get my hopes up about revenue.

If the trailers are a truthful barometer of the film I wouldn't get my hopes up either although they are aiming quite a bit younger with this iteration so the kids might save it. The primary colours make it feel like an extension of the cartoon rather than the films - right down to female Spengler's hair and glasses.




von Boom

Quote from: Stan on 26 May, 2016, 12:07:08 PM
I'd rather eat a bullet than watch another Feig/McCarthy team up

My feelings exactly. I have no trouble with making changes to the film, but these two are just not funny.

TordelBack

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 26 May, 2016, 01:03:45 PM
- right down to female Spengler's hair and glasses.

Thought that McKinnon was the Venkwoman and Wiig the Spengirl? Damn this is confusing! It's almost as if they are different films!

You're right about the look and TRGB.  Not necessarily a bad thing. .

Professor Bear

I am slightly troubled by the unchallenged assumption that people who think this will suck do so "because women", and not "because I have seen the trailer."

Ghost MacRoth

Or even 'I have seen the directors previous work'. ;)
I don't have a drinking problem.  I drink, I get drunk, I fall over.  No problem!

TordelBack

Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2016, 02:16:29 PM
I am slightly troubled by the unchallenged assumption that people who think this will suck do so "because women", and not "because I have seen the trailer."

Is it not less of an assumption and more a generalisation based on reading endless comments to the effect of the former, even before the hopeless first trailer appeared? 

Hawkmumbler

Quote from: Tordelback on 26 May, 2016, 02:21:02 PM
Quote from: Professor Bear on 26 May, 2016, 02:16:29 PM
I am slightly troubled by the unchallenged assumption that people who think this will suck do so "because women", and not "because I have seen the trailer."

Is it not less of an assumption and more a generalisation based on reading endless comments to the effect of the former, even before the hopeless first trailer appeared?
This. If I thought it looked a bad movie I would say thus. I don't think it looks bad.

JOE SOAP

#131
Quote from: Tordelback on 26 May, 2016, 02:08:11 PM
You're right about the look and TRGB.  Not necessarily a bad thing. .

I assume it's trying to appeal to the nostalgia of those who grew up on the cartoon - that ran for 5 years and got rebooted again - as well as trying to capture a new generation of kids.

Would I have liked a direct legacy sequel to the original cast version?

Sure I would - GB2 looked so unappealing I've never seen more than 3 continuous minutes of it. I'd want a proper sequel set decades later with ghosts being so numerous that they've become citizens - working crappy jobs and socially interacting with the living - with the original Ghostbusters acting as chiefs of a sanctioned, fully manned/womanned, paranormal police force.

But no one cares what I want and they shouldn't have to - I'm too old to care about.



I, Cosh

Genuinely baffled by the repeated knocking of Ghostbusters 2 in this thread. Vigo the Carpathian is great!
We never really die.

Satanist

Quote from: The Cosh on 26 May, 2016, 02:51:59 PM
Genuinely baffled by the repeated knocking of Ghostbusters 2 in this thread. Vigo the Carpathian is great!

Ghostbusters 2 is not a good film. This does not look like a good film. I do not think women are responsible for my failings.
Hmm, just pretend I wrote something witty eh?

TordelBack

Vigo and his painting are good. Everything else is dull.