Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.
Topic: I might go see the new Ghostbusters movie this week.
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM started this discussion 10 years ago#54,129
My brother, who already saw it, said it wasn't that bad at all and even managed to tie it in with the originals which is more than what I thought it would have done. I thought it was going to be more or less a shameless ripoff of the original film, but it's actually a sequel.
Actual Spoiler Bill Murray has a role in the film. (lol) Not as Venkman though. Wtf, Bill? Are you trolling us?
kook !!OPZbEQMT1 joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 34 minutes later[^][v]#704,638
He was threatened with a lawsuit if he didn't support the film
D-g !jJEom8Ii3E joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 3 hours later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,679
Your big or little brother?
squeegee joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,761
it IS a reboot, it's not a sequel at all. nothing "ties to the original." there are some easter eggs i won't spoil, but that's it. this movie exists in a universe where these women are the only and original Ghostbusters, and none of the original cast play their original characters. it's a reboot with fan service, that's it.
my opinion: it wasn't as bad as the critics said it would be, but it IS nothing but regurgitated hollywood tripe. you've seen this plot a hundred times before, and the comedy does not make it excusable in any way. i laughed at one joke, close to the end. the rest were hardly even amusing, and none of the jokes were unexpected. everything was on-the-nose and it made the movie feel predictable and slow. it also suffers from 2 act syndrome which makes the pacing feel at the same time rushed and plodding. by the time the movie is over you just want it to be done even though it feels like the plot just races along without slowing down.
i don't like 2 act movies. it's a relatively new phenomenon coming out of hollywood, and i rather hate it. batman vs. superman is 2 act, and it sucks. Independence day 2 is 2 act and it sucks. all for the same reasons. the plot refuses to slow down, but at the same time the acts seemingly never end and it's just exhausting. it's like the new formula for summer blockbuster crap, for some reason.
anyway, the new ghostbusters wasn't all bad. i at least finished it, i can't say that for independence day 2. it wasn't really funny and the plot seemed familiar and it didn't really do anything to set itself apart. except to cast women in all of the roles.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 17 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,777
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 30 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,800
@704,781 (Catherine !TGirlYJKXM)
that's not how it works, it's a reboot, you retard. a sequel is a fucking sequel. meaning it comes after the original. this is a reboot. a new replacement for the originals. think of it like an alternate reality where all of the original cast are other people and the original events never happened.
it is not a fucking sequel.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,818
@previous (squeegee)
So nobody said anything like "This is just like that time the staypuft marshmallow man came to life all those years ago!" ?
squeegee joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 8 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,830
@previous (H)
fuck no. clean slate. as if the original plots never happened.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 36 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,832
@704,761 (squeegee)
When will you learn to hide your aggressive sexism beneath more than a veneer of 'considered analysis' or 'even handed judgment'. Regressive cunt.
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 28 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,851
@704,800 (squeegee)
A reboot would have completely not acknowledged the originals at all. Star Trek (2009) despite being referred to as a reboot is still a sequel because part of the story transpires in the Prime timeline.
squeegee replied with this 10 years ago, 16 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,859
@previous (Catherine !TGirlYJKXM)
it fucking didn't dude! that's what i'm saying. it didn't acknowledge the previous movies in any way in the plot. a parade float in the shape of the stay puffed marshmellow man doesn't make it a sequel. no one believed in ghosts, there never were any ghost busters. Peter Vinkman doesn't exist. AT ALL. bill murray even plays a different dude altogether. the photonpacks were a brand new invention made by someone other than Egon Spengler and no one had ever caught a ghost before. this is NOT a fucking sequel, it's not even in the same fucking universe, it's a reboot with zero ties to the original. it's essentially a remake but it's drastically different which makes it a reboot. they took the original concept, changed almost every thing about it, wrote a new story, and made a movie of it.
it's a reboot. it's not a fucking sequel. god damn. go learn what a fucking sequel is, jesus fuck.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 45 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^][v]#704,878