Discuss all things Ghostbusters here, unless they would be better suited in one of the few forums below.
#4912096
RichardLess wrote: January 17th, 2019, 3:48 amHave you seen the Red Letter Media Plinkett review for GB16? It's glorious. They actually re edit a scene and make it better by removing all the lame quips and improv and doing so creates tension. If you haven't seen it, oh man, remedy that ASAP. They don't hold back. I've reccomend even the people that enjoyed GB16 give it a watch. It might help in showing some of you how we view this travesty of celluloid.
Yep. Their break down and the fan edit are what made me realize that GB2016 could have been good with the exact same story and actors. It's how I know sexism isn't what made the movie fail.
deadderek, SpaceBallz liked this
#4912098
RichardLess wrote: January 17th, 2019, 3:54 am Here's the link to the Plinkett review for anyone who hasn't watched it.

https://youtu.be/AHUV8QLpEAc
Also, for a less satirical break down of the movie here is the "Half in the Bag" episode where they discuss it in a normal fashion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA
#4912100
I feel like I'm in the middle of some argument, looking left and right while thinking why are we doing this again? After two years I think our minds are made up wether we like the movie or don't, but why are we doing the same thing again hoping it will yield different results?
#4912101
Wiggyof9 wrote: January 17th, 2019, 3:52 am
RichardLess wrote: January 17th, 2019, 3:48 amHave you seen the Red Letter Media Plinkett review for GB16? It's glorious. They actually re edit a scene and make it better by removing all the lame quips and improv and doing so creates tension. If you haven't seen it, oh man, remedy that ASAP. They don't hold back. I've reccomend even the people that enjoyed GB16 give it a watch. It might help in showing some of you how we view this travesty of celluloid.
Yep. Their break down and the fan edit are what made me realize that GB2016 could have been good with the exact same story and actors. It's how I know sexism isn't what made the movie fail.
However it is a big part. Look online you'll see stuff like

https://www.instagram.com/p/yZ_ET4mhY0/ ... V-BQ8BlkNc

https://twitter.com/soncharm/status/560 ... 26208?s=19

And more. I've personally seen a girl in my family as I've mentioned assaulted for shearing a Ghostbusters too because "you all ruined Ghostbusters" as they said

Lots of people mocked it and made gender the focus with the tired argument "women aren't funny" to say the hate had nothing to do with it , are you kidding?

74% on rotten tomatoes as it's a good movie , that's the same level as Thor , Avengers age of Ultron and more. higher than iron man 2 , all the transformers movies and more

So you have trolls and the sexists warping the movie in people's mind then Angry Video Game Nerd, announced that he wouldn’t review the movie, or even see it, because “If you already know you’re going to hate it, why give them your money?” and people to listen to him so they think they'll hate it because of the sexist stuff and it now makes no money. (Note not blaming him I'm just saying that as him and many online reviewers took same stance so the sexism makes people hate then they get told if you hate don't watch it's a bad combo)

IMDb votes reveals a profound imbalance: Nearly eight times as many male voters as female, with women ranking the movie twice as high as men. (There’s a disparity among professional reviews as well, though not nearly so pronounced.) Even if it’s not the only factor, it takes some seriously tortured logic to argue that gender has nothing to do with the anti-“Ghostbusters” backlash. The backlash made it fail. If the internet trolls get enough steam people start believing it. Look at DC, every movie gets hit with the idea it's completely terrible. Their not. That's why the movie failed. Trolls and sexists turned away the casual audience.

And if people say oh no it's just a reboot that's why , how come the videogame with all the actors in it that was treated like a 3rd movie wasn't more successful?
Lefty Throckmorton liked this
#4912102
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 4:35 am I feel like I'm in the middle of some argument, looking left and right while thinking why are we doing this again? After two years I think our minds are made up wether we like the movie or don't, but why are we doing the same thing again hoping it will yield different results?
I can't answer for other people but here's my reason:

It's fun talking, debating movies. GB16 is so bad I just can't comphrend anyone liking it AND the original. I mean..it's like an Adam Sandler comedy or something lol.

Plus maybe someone will watch that review and learn something. Maybe realize the movie is actually poorly done. Or, conversely(though less likely) that's it's not as bad as some(me) say
#4912103
Or you know, we stop this nonsense after 3 years, as it seems to be done just to troll the other side.

I'm far more interested in the new movie at the moment, or the discussion I had with Wiggly about the female position in Hollywood.

Wiggly said the wage Gap is a myth, but I just found this for instance?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanity ... mes-up/amp
#4912106
SSJmole wrote: January 17th, 2019, 5:40 am
Wiggyof9 wrote: January 17th, 2019, 3:52 am

Yep. Their break down and the fan edit are what made me realize that GB2016 could have been good with the exact same story and actors. It's how I know sexism isn't what made the movie fail.
However it is a big part. Look online you'll see stuff like

https://www.instagram.com/p/yZ_ET4mhY0/ ... V-BQ8BlkNc

https://twitter.com/soncharm/status/560 ... 26208?s=19

And more. I've personally seen a girl in my family as I've mentioned assaulted for shearing a Ghostbusters too because "you all ruined Ghostbusters" as they said

Lots of people mocked it and made gender the focus with the tired argument "women aren't funny" to say the hate had nothing to do with it , are you kidding?

74% on rotten tomatoes as it's a good movie , that's the same level as Thor , Avengers age of Ultron and more. higher than iron man 2 , all the transformers movies and more

So you have trolls and the sexists warping the movie in people's mind then Angry Video Game Nerd, announced that he wouldn’t review the movie, or even see it, because “If you already know you’re going to hate it, why give them your money?” and people to listen to him so they think they'll hate it because of the sexist stuff and it now makes no money. (Note not blaming him I'm just saying that as him and many online reviewers took same stance so the sexism makes people hate then they get told if you hate don't watch it's a bad combo)

IMDb votes reveals a profound imbalance: Nearly eight times as many male voters as female, with women ranking the movie twice as high as men. (There’s a disparity among professional reviews as well, though not nearly so pronounced.) Even if it’s not the only factor, it takes some seriously tortured logic to argue that gender has nothing to do with the anti-“Ghostbusters” backlash. The backlash made it fail. If the internet trolls get enough steam people start believing it. Look at DC, every movie gets hit with the idea it's completely terrible. Their not. That's why the movie failed. Trolls and sexists turned away the casual audience.

And if people say oh no it's just a reboot that's why , how come the videogame with all the actors in it that was treated like a 3rd movie wasn't more successful?
The movie failed because it was poorly marketed. There were just as many Trolls moaning about a black storm trooper and a female protagonist, but guess what? Star Wars didn't reboot. It was a continuation. And a MASSIVE success. Blaming trolls and sexist is silly. They were a much smaller minority than you realize.

You honestly think someone won't go see a movie because a sexist on the internet told them it was a bad movie. That first trailer sunk the movie. I work in the industry and while I don't know for sure, I've heard people lost their jobs over that trailer.

Blaming trolls and sexist is giving the filmmakers a pass for releasing something fans didn't want. While some of you liked it, 99.9% were looking forward to a GB3. The results are on them. No one else.
Also a video game isn't a movie. And the game was developed by one company and then released by another. It was a messy situation. Plus we don't know the actual numbers of the video game. We don't know how much it cost. Or how much it made.
#4912108
RichardLess wrote: January 17th, 2019, 6:48 am While some of you liked it, 99.9% were looking forward to a GB3.
I am looking forward to a sequel, even though I'm legit sad and scary how they will handle Egon and Bill. Yet I also like the reboot. The one doesn't exclude the other imo.

But let's not throw numbers. RT has shown that the audience was divided almost 50 %. That's not some.
This argument is silly after 3 years and we should end it.
*NormalGamer* liked this
#4912109
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 6:45 am Or you know, we stop this nonsense after 3 years, as it seems to be done just to troll the other side.

I'm far more interested in the new movie at the moment, or the discussion I had with Wiggly about the female position in Hollywood.

Wiggly said the wage Gap is a myth, but I just found this for instance?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanity ... mes-up/amp
Non sense? Did you read the title and OP post? I mean what were you expecting?

The big divide in GB fandom from now until the new movie is GB16 supporters and GB16 haters. If you don't want that talked about, dissected and debated ad nauseam, I'm not sure you are in the right place.
#4912111
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 6:54 am
RichardLess wrote: January 17th, 2019, 6:48 am While some of you liked it, 99.9% were looking forward to a GB3.
I am looking forward to a sequel, even though I'm legit sad and scary how they will handle Egon and Bill. Yet I also like the reboot. The one doesn't exclude the other imo.

But let's not throw numbers. RT has shown that the audience was divided almost 50 %. That's not some.
This argument is silly after 3 years and we should end it.
I agree. I didn't say that did exclude the other. The point was to say "no one was asking for a reboot. We wanted a sequel" whether you liked the end result is meaningless to what I was getting at.

Also RT is so easy to game. Number could be higher than that, could be lower. It means nothing. My point was Sony didn't give the fans what they originally were asking for. A sequel to the originals. Take a poll in 2014 and ask if Gb fans wanted a sequel or reboot I'm betting a very large majority would've said sequel. That's my point. Most Fans wanted that but Sony went in another direction.
#4912117
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 7:03 am The problem however is the audience isn't just fans, we aren't that big a fandom, and the option sequel at the time wasn't a possibility for all the reasons we already know.

And again, the one doesn't exclude the other.
You're saying that like i said "the audience is only made up of fans". I know the audience is more than fans. I'm not talking about anyone else but the fans. What I'm saying is that Sony did not listen to the fans. A reboot was not something we or anyone were asking for or wanting. Most fans wanted and expected(at some point) a GB3. When Feig floated the idea of GB16 the answer should've been "no that's not a direction we want to go in" knowing that that fans, and probably most people, were expecting a 3rd film. Ghostbusters may not have as active a fanbase, but is a dearly beloved classic. You don't screw with that on a whim. See Sony's accounting books for the result.
#4912121
In my opinion the mysognists were a loud minority... I rarely ever saw anyone specifically bitching about the cast being female.

I own a copy of the limited "PopArt SteelBook Edition" of Ghostbusters: ATC, I own the Lego Dimensions GB:ATC story pack and I really enjoy how Erik Burnham used the characters in GB 101 and forward. When the news first popped up and my girlfriend was pissed that the next GB flick would have an all female cast (she... isn't a big fan of gender-washing), I felt like "Why not? Let them pick up the torch."

So..., obviously I like to believe that I'm not misogynic in any way.

But that doesn't mean that I think that ATC is a good Ghostbusters movie or even a good idea from the very beginning.

Fans of the franchise waited for 27 years and when the wait was "over" all they got was a reboot retconning/killing off the universe they loved, turning the original cast into cheap cameos, changing the formula in weird ways (destroying ghosts?) and full of infantile jokes. It's a decently produced movie having it's own target audience and funny moments but I'd argue that it's not a good Ghostbusters movie. And thus a really bad idea considering it was so hard to even revive the franchise. A movie differing so heavily from the originals was bound to turn off a huge chunk of the fanbase and the resulting financial flop could have been the final nail in the coffin.

So the fact that a true GB3 will be made is just plain awesome and, if successful, will hopefully prove that love and respect towards the source material is important when a franchise is getting revived. (Something I'd like the creators of the next TMNT reboot to consider...)

According to the "Rust City" rumors the new team will be half female. I didn't hear anyone complain about that - so where are the "mysognists" demanding an all male team now?

I don't say that there weren't any misogynic comments, only that they were a loud minority.
#4912122
They explored the posibility of a sequel for 30 years, while I get that we all would have loved a sequel in 2016, it just wasn't in the cards. Fans wated something impossible at the time. The only thing after many years of trying and script writing was a reboot with new characters because Ramis died and Bill didn't want to do it. Sure, it's easy to say in hindsight they shouldn't have made that gamble, but they did. While an actual promising sequel script just came in a few weeks to late.

Deciding to go reboot wasn't a whim. This was them desperate to finally get GB back into the spotlight after so many years and making a well thought out gamble.

And you know what? It paid off. Ghost Corps is established, we have themepark rides, hotels, comics, VR games that are fun, merch, boardgames and while the movie component wasn't as succesful GB is back on the map, making money left and right. We now have two new movies to look forward to .
*NormalGamer* liked this
#4912123
Slimered wrote: January 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew -
The only way that is ALL you saw, would have been because that was ALL you were focusing on. The majority of people that had a problem with the 2016 version disliked that it was being rebooted instead of being a sequel. So when you post here that is ALL you saw, most people will read that and just check out on everything you type after as pearl clutching BS.

The majority of the people were not misogynist sexist racist pigs. Those idiots were the loudest and got the most attention on social media, mostly for article click bait, but that didn't make them the majority.

You are literally on a website right now where you could look up a history of posts where the majority of people complaining were not the type of people you are describing.

I'm sorry, but I fundamentally disagree with your point of view. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. It's dangerous and quite frankly insulting to the vast majority of the GB fandom. The 2016 version was simply not blockbuster quality. You can't blame internet trolls for the quality of the movie.

With all that said... I don't think the ATC crew is done at all. Which is also why I think you need to reign in the whole "sky is falling" on the ATC version.

I think either the end of the movie or after the credits scene will introduce parallel universes to the GB world. The original crew and the reboot crew will be in the same universe as cannon. That's the Win Win Win for us all.
Alphagaia, montclaire, *NormalGamer* and 1 others liked this
#4912124
I agree with Nova!
Though we had some very vocal trolls in our community. Some with numerous alts.

Regarding the all you see argument is something that was problematic for both sides and not only the fault of that person.
Facebook, Youtube, Social media in general has a tendecy to show you things that triggers a response out of you. If you debate a lot about say mysoginists or femenists it shows you more of this in hopes you watch it or even respond.
#4912125
Slimered wrote: January 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm I haven't been on this forum for a while because the Ghostbusters fandom has become a toxic place. Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew - abuse which created a negative word of mouth around Ghostbusters (2016), and ended with Paul Feig's directorial record tarnished before his blockbuster Summer tentpole movie directing career had even begun.

Paul Feig will probably only be able to direct 15/R-rated comedy films now, and we'll likely never see him direct a big Summer blockbuster again.

What made me come back was today's announcement of Ghostbusters 3, a film that's a direct sequel to the original 1984 continuity. Now I'm very excited about this film, and I can't wait to see it, but the behind-the-scenes issue with this film is that it's letting the sexists win.

This is exactly what those disgusting misogynists wanted. In their minds, it validates their 'point' that women fighting ghosts 'doesn't work' (even though it does), and turns what should really be a harmless supernatural comedy movie into a political victory for people who only spread hate and contempt towards others.

I hope Jason Reitman has a plan to address this before the film's release.


I honestly do not understand your comment. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but the overwhelming majority of feedback for the 2016 film was not racist or sexist, although Feig and the studio certainly hyped it as such. Many, including myself, would have been fine with new female cast members if the studio didn't crap all over the source material. Many, including myself, just didn't find the movie funny or to the standards that were set by the first film. That does not make a person sexist or racist, just a person with an opinion, which we are all entitled to.

As far as race, I will bet that for many of us the only African American action figure that we had as a child, or at least remember having, was Winston. Erie Hudson's character was an integral part of the team in both movies and the cartoon - why would any fan reject having a black cast member? What I recall at the time was reading many comments that bashed Feig for introducing a character who undermined what Winston represented in the series - a competent, even-footed member of the team. The original material had been color blind - why change that now?

I will agree that a lot of the commentary got out of hand. But at the end of the day, what I was seeing were fans who were increasingly frustrated by what was coming out of Sony, and felt that a property which they regarded with such great respect deserved to be treated that way. When Feig and the cast went on the offensive (huge mistake), and told people how they should feel or think, or that their opinions did not matter or that they were even racist or sexist for being critical, the pot boiled over. I'm not saying anyone was right for reacting the way they did, but I do think it was more from frustration than anything.

Why are you so worried about Paul Feig's career? At the end of the day, Feig made a niche movie on a blockbuster budget and it under performed for what was invested. He made a lot of mistakes but that was the biggest one, and it was HIS to make. The rest is subjective but I really don't care for his brand of lowbrow humor, either. The original was a witty, sophisticated dark comedy. I think if Feig respected the tone of the original you wouldn't have heard very much at all about a female cast.

A point I have to make is that you are talking about sexism but the film itself was admittedly feministic and that, my friend, is still sexism. Putting one race or gender over the other is still wrong no matter how you slice it. I would give a little leeway if the original film WAS sexist, and Feig turned the tables but G1 had strong female characters who were treated with respect. There was no reach for equality here - just a poke in the eye to male fans. At least that's how I took it, primarily because that's how Feig and the studio promoted it. I also had a Janine action figure as a child, and I never made her out to be a buffoon like Hemsworth's character - she was a capable member of the team during play. She busted ghosts with the best of them.

Yes, there will be some who will claim this new film as a political victory. But for me, all I want to see is a film that treats the material with respect. I don't want to be preached to or be told what to think. I also want a little fan service - Star Wars fans got to see Han and Chewie back in the Falcon and I want to see the gang back in the Ecto. I am not a bad person for wanting that. I hear that they are casting four young leads, two male and two female, and that is fine with me.

My two cents. Thanks.
#4912127
Nova wrote: January 17th, 2019, 8:00 am
I think either the end of the movie or after the credits scene will introduce parallel universes to the GB world. The original crew and the reboot crew will be in the same universe as cannon. That's the Win Win Win for us all.


Personally I don't want to see any reference to ATC at all. Let this film stand on its own.
#4912128
Slimered wrote: January 16th, 2019, 3:54 pmThis is exactly what those disgusting misogynists wanted. In their minds, it validates their 'point' that women fighting ghosts 'doesn't work' (even though it does), and turns what should really be a harmless supernatural comedy movie into a political victory for people who only spread hate and contempt towards others.
Considering that the new Ghostbusters are rumored to be four teenagers (two male, two female) it does not validate them that "women fighting ghosts doesn't work."

I understand the overall point, but I disagree. This isn't validating misogynists. This is validating the people who wanted the next Ghostbusters movie to be connected to the originals. Gender has nothing to do with it.
Last edited by Doctor Venkman on January 17th, 2019, 9:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
montclaire liked this
#4912129
savintheday wrote: January 17th, 2019, 12:23 am
Slimered wrote: January 16th, 2019, 3:54 pmPaul Feig will probably only be able to direct 15/R-rated comedy films now, and we'll likely never see him direct a big Summer blockbuster again.
Good.

To your point about female GB's, I think most people don't have a problem with that concept, so long as it isn't jammed down our throats with a dose of social politics. Of course women can be Ghostbusters! Just don't be sanctimonious pricks about it!
I don't see how they were 'pricks'. They have a right to defend themselves against sexist abuse.
SSJmole, devilmanozzy liked this
#4912130
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 6:45 am Or you know, we stop this nonsense after 3 years, as it seems to be done just to troll the other side.

I'm far more interested in the new movie at the moment, or the discussion I had with Wiggly about the female position in Hollywood.

Wiggly said the wage Gap is a myth, but I just found this for instance?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanity ... mes-up/amp
First, I dont know if you are intentionally getting my screen name wrong or not, but please stop.

Second, i said the wage gap as a whoke is a myth. The study that "proves" it did not compare salaries within the same job, it compared all salaries. It compared how much all women made on average to how much all men made on average. Thats not hiw you compare wages. When comparing male and female averages within the same industry, there is not a wage gap.

I also said that the entertainment industry is different. In acting you are selling yourself. You bargain for a price. If a studio really wants you, you get more money if you hold out.

The article you list is comparing Mark Wahlberg to Michelle Williams. Not exactly apples to apples. Wahlberg has been around a long time in entertainment. He has starred in major blockbusters which made lots of money. I had to look up Michelle Williams and even then i had no idea who she was. It also compared him to Emma Stone. She was in The Amazing Spider-Man, but that franchise flopped so it doesnt help her case.

Inequality of outcome doesnt mean inequality of opportunity. One man earning more than one woman doesnt speak for the industry. There are plenty if male actors that make a lot less than Emma Stone. Is that due to sexism?
montclaire liked this
#4912131
Didn't get your screenname wrong on purpose! Sorry, I can see how that is irritating, especially when we are debating.

Anyways, it compares Emmo Stone and Walbergh and says those are the best paid actors. WIth a huge difference between them. That's the problem. While I agree there will always be people more popular and are thus able to negotiate for more money, you still have to be asked for the role in the first place, and it seems the men are in a better position here.
seekandannoy liked this
#4912133
Alphagaia wrote: January 17th, 2019, 9:11 am Didn't get your screenname wrong on purpose! Sorry, I can see how that is irritating, especially when we are debating.

Anyways, it compares Emmo Stone and Walbergh and says those are the best paid actors. WIth a huge difference between them. That's the problem. While I agree there will always be people more popular and are thus able to negotiate for more money, you still have to be asked for the role in the first place, and it seems the men are in a better position here.
All the article shows is that Mark Wahlberg makes way too much money. Where is the industry average salary vs. Average box office earnings? What did Mark's movies make vs Emma's? Why was Mark in the roles he was in?

Emma Stone tends to be in comedy movies and dramas, which tend not to be huge blockbusters. Mark Wahlberg tends to be in big action popcorn movies that make a ton of money. It stands to reason he made more. And that is all this article shows.
#4912135
Slimered wrote: January 17th, 2019, 8:57 am
savintheday wrote: January 17th, 2019, 12:23 am
Good.

To your point about female GB's, I think most people don't have a problem with that concept, so long as it isn't jammed down our throats with a dose of social politics. Of course women can be Ghostbusters! Just don't be sanctimonious pricks about it!
I don't see how they were 'pricks'. They have a right to defend themselves against sexist abuse.
You are wrong. The Ghostbusters fandom has told me that if they speak out they are just been "sanctimonious" but the trolls that made them speak out because of sheer volume of hatred spewed , well those are just small amount.

Now why do you think we are misogynists? All we are doing is saying women should shut up and not defend themselves. I bought the original on VHS , dvd and Blu-ray so that gives me the right to call Melissa McCarthy fat and tell her to kill herself.



Yes I was obviously been sarcastic to make my point. As the hatred was EVERYWHERE and just dismissing it as a vocal minority while also hating the victims of the hatred defending themselves basically sends the message that it was okay to act that way. It wasn't.

I've used star wars was an example in the past. I do not like the new star wars at all and think it actually hurts the original. However I've also gone on record as saying the hatred Daisy Ridley got was not called for at all. The problems are not the actresses fault , her gender has 0 to do with the success or failure or the film.

Ghostbusters fans alot of them won't even acknowledge how dangerous and how nasty the hate was and say it's just because a reboot without even looking at what happened. Leslie Jones quit Twitter after getting racist and misogynistic tweets bombarding her.

Like I said the original actors supported the actresses and the movie but somehow the fans think they know better. It was shocking and appalling behaviour. There is no defending it.

Now if you don't like the movie because you didn't find it funny or you actually hate it was reboot or whatever that's okay. But you can't deny how bad the fandom looks with the handling of their gender on this.


Selfishly I'll say to me this
https://youtu.be/A0TS3w-srrs
Scene is better than anything in ghostbusters 2 and I genuinely smiles like a little kid the whoe scene (clip is missing the "You guys, this is exactly how I pictured my death." Line that had me cracking up)


Also this is funny in a really cool way

https://youtu.be/A76LFGvmbXM
Slimered liked this
#4912139
I showed the teaser to my wife last night, who really doesn't care one way or the other. She called to my daughter in the other room to show her the clip, and said "they're doing another Ghostbuster movie! But with the original guys - not those awful women." I didn't prompt any of this, and didn't comment on it. It was all her.

My daughter was really excited after she saw the teaser but was upset that she has to wait until 2020.
#4912145
Slimered wrote: January 17th, 2019, 8:57 am
savintheday wrote: January 17th, 2019, 12:23 am
Good.

To your point about female GB's, I think most people don't have a problem with that concept, so long as it isn't jammed down our throats with a dose of social politics. Of course women can be Ghostbusters! Just don't be sanctimonious pricks about it!
I don't see how they were 'pricks'. They have a right to defend themselves against sexist abuse.
I'm saying that good female characters can exist without making a big deal that they're female. This was done in the past numerous times without all the political stink. Gender of characters in movies isn't as big a deal to most people as the authors of clickbait articles would like you to believe. A good character is a good character, and people will relate to them regardless of gender.

With ATC, at least in the marketing aspect, a big deal was made about the leads being female, and a spotlight shined on the vocal minority of trolls who had a problem with that, while simultaneously lumping in anyone with valid criticism. They could've just tuned it out and focused on making a good movie, but they chose to make it into a big sideshow on twitter and talk shows, exhibiting desperation and a lack of faith in their movie. They knew they had a stinkburger on their hands, so in they had to find a scapegoat. No such thing as bad publicity, right? Nothing like a healthy dose of social politics to reel people in to see your family fun summer blockbuster!

ATC failed because it was a poorly made film with an even worse marketing angle, not because of sexism.

The announcement of a proper sequel doesn't mean that "the sexists win". In this case, we all win.
#4912146
Nova wrote: January 17th, 2019, 8:00 am
Slimered wrote: January 16th, 2019, 3:54 pm Ever since the release of Ghostbusters (2016) all I've seen are torrents of sexist and racist abuse hurled towards the Ghostbusters (2016) cast and crew -
The only way that is ALL you saw, would have been because that was ALL you were focusing on. The majority of people that had a problem with the 2016 version disliked that it was being rebooted instead of being a sequel. So when you post here that is ALL you saw, most people will read that and just check out on everything you type after as pearl clutching BS.

The majority of the people were not misogynist sexist racist pigs. Those idiots were the loudest and got the most attention on social media, mostly for article click bait, but that didn't make them the majority.

You are literally on a website right now where you could look up a history of posts where the majority of people complaining were not the type of people you are describing.

I'm sorry, but I fundamentally disagree with your point of view. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. It's dangerous and quite frankly insulting to the vast majority of the GB fandom. The 2016 version was simply not blockbuster quality. You can't blame internet trolls for the quality of the movie.

With all that said... I don't think the ATC crew is done at all. Which is also why I think you need to reign in the whole "sky is falling" on the ATC version.

I think either the end of the movie or after the credits scene will introduce parallel universes to the GB world. The original crew and the reboot crew will be in the same universe as cannon. That's the Win Win Win for us all.
@ *referrring to bold*

Yeah, just like in the IDW comics (it was already introduced there so perhaps the same could be done for the original GB '84 movie canon); and this was one of the original ideas Aykroyd touted ever since GB '84 was in development back then before it was released in that decade.
Alphagaia liked this

got a link? It appears that some time today[…]

I love that. I actually think a better version of […]

Afterlife Ecto Goggles Build

Thank you for posting this information. This is a[…]

I'd really like to see the new t-shirt unlocks t[…]