I know I expect new clothes to be dirty and look used.Originally Posted by VHS
I know I expect new clothes to be dirty and look used.
Nah I ain't got around to watching the new Batman movies yet. The Burbs is dope though.
you are an absolute imbecile.Bottom line, and final say on this (and I know how silly it is to criticize)... they shouldn't look "brand new." They should look like they've been used before, not like they've just be tailored the day before. Boom, done.
What made you think of KARATE KID?
(I liked Karate Kid 2. Wasn't bad, it was ok.)
oooooh I can't wait until the paedos latch on to this.
Last edited by The Rogerer; August 8th, 2015 at 4:34 AM.
Why will my people latch on to this?
The original suits didn't even really look dirty.
Yeah, but those pants are pretty wrinkly.. Shows character.
They don't look brand new either.The original suits didn't even really look dirty.
Sure they do. They don't look like they've been folded or pressed, but they look new as shit. They don't have a mark on them.
They look like what Bill Casey said:
Nothing about the original suits look particularly aged or distressed.
I'm not trying to pile on, but the look of the new suits isn't high on the list of things I'm concerned with.
I'll work on not nitpicking this junk here on out.
Did you have doubts on the first joke you made before your edit or did you just change words around to freshen up a piss poor joke?
you know nothing of humor, though. and rog was probably going less for a joke and more just a reference to your shitty existence.
Calm down morrison. Everything's gonna be alright.
Thanks to this thread, when I eventually see this movie I won't be able to focus on anything but the suits.
Thanks fuckers.
You'll be happy that it's all you can focus on. So, you are welcome.
http://nerdist.com/report-bill-murra...usters-reboot/
Bill is in GB3! But, he is not going to be Dr. Peter Venkmen. Apparently, this is a total reboot thus the first two movies never, ever, ever happened.
...
It being a total reboot came out a while ago. There was a rumor that they wanted Murray to play a character similar to Walter Peck from the original.
He'd be better as a sleazy version of Rick Moranis
It's hard for me to imagine a "sleazy" Louis Tully. He's like Butters.
That's not what I meant. I meant remove Rick Moranis from your mind and replace his space in the film with a sleazy jerk, like a human Pepe Le Pew and you have a character I'd enjoy from Bill Murray in this sure to be dreadful film.
That makes more sense.
Imagine him and Melissa McCarthy playing off each other's sexually charged performance.
Amazing.
Or the first two movies are a preboot and this one never happened...
I've heard rumors that Old Boy and Robocop are actually preboots of some other movie...
Last edited by Bill Casey; August 9th, 2015 at 7:24 PM.
Or you could watch St. Vincent.
Rick Moranis should play Sigourney Weaver.
Or Gozer.
Definitely Gozer.
Gozer should be a CGI Harold Ramis.
Must spread my ectoplasmic slime around on others before slimming you.
I hope Murray is playing a ghost of some sort.
I don't think this movie will be any good, with or without Murray or even if Ramis was still alive.
Though I do feel him deciding to be a part of this in any capacity now is a bit wrong, especially when he was the constant hold up when Ramis was alive. That doesn't mean I think GB3 would be any good if it were a straight up sequel with everybody back, including an alive and well Ramis. I just think this is something that should be left alone. The entire franchise has been in development hell for so long that I don't really think this is something that's being done with integrity in mind, only the dollar.
It's a lot like the news in recent days of another Nightmare on Elmstreet reboot. I mean...I guess the thing now is if a remake doesn't make enough bank to justify relaunching a franchise...just keeping making more remakes until one of them does....aka throw shit against the wall until something sticks...eventually something will. I don't buy into different visions from different artists anymore. Its all about the safe dollar with no integrity.
Thankfully, they can't erase the original GB or its sequel, nor can they erase the original ANOES franchise or Englund as Freddy. I can still watch those 80s classics.
Strangely enough, I have some faith in Episode 7 of Star Wars, but that's only because I see some visual evidence of some actual care being put into the film, and I know many of the old characters will be back again, the foundation is more believable.
He should be the ghost that sucks all the Ghostbusters into a tiny box and then houses them in an environmentally friends storage device.
I was asking you to explain whatever your worthless point about 'feminist' was going to be, but I thought better of it.
I wasn't aware such a film existed.
Cool.
Since we don't have an official Ghostbusters thread, i'll post these here:
So beautiful. Details and price:
$350 is insane, but it comes with a lot of stuff.
fucking hell, that looks shockingly bad.
TAPS AFF!
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
...yeah, not sure. I like that piano version of the theme, though.
I won't go to the theater to watch this but I will probably rent it just to give it a chance. The first one is the ultimate, the 2nd one was alright. This one definitely screams like they want to just make a little money.
I .. I ... I don't even know what to think. It seems like a "Scary Movie"-esq film.. but it's ... serious? Serious in the sense that it isn't a deliberate "parody" - despite 'borrowing' the premise and, it seems, parts of plot line (the "winston" joining, particularly.. and the hearse, well, it's a cadillac, the talking to a nice ghost -> evil ghost in the library, the getting slimed..). And despite the opening "title" about "30 years ago bla bla.." it seems like there's a level of ignorance to the original (i.e. where did all the old gear go?) - maybe that's a trailer thing though.
A small part of me wants to see it - just because Ghostbusters. The majority of me wants to never give them money to do this to another film ever again.
Well, i....i dunno. It feels like it doesnt really capture the spirit of ghostbusters and is more of a GB fan film.
Fuck that
Stuff like that might be addressed in the movie. The trailer's not going to spell it all out for you. Your comments about borrowing plot elements just makes me think of the much heralded pile of meh, The Force Awakens. So if this movie's subpar, you can just do what the Star Wars fans do and make up a bunch of theories and spin your own ideas to make it seem better than it is.
Looks like another tribute film - basically steal the plot of the first but don't go as far as a direct remake, they are popular these days - the Force Awakens, Creed, Jurassic World etc. I understand it though, basically gets kids into the franchise and gives adults a nostalgia buzz.
I'll wait till I see it (which will likely be 2018) before casting judgement, its pretty much goosed from the get-go as it just can't compare to the original, they struck gold with that - imagine getting a comedy cast of Bill Murray, Dan Akroyd, Harold Ramis and Rick Moranis with support from Sigourney Weaver and Ernie Hudson. I don't think its even remotely possible at this point in time.
And Jesus Wept...
Gotta see Hellraiser now.
I will save the thread:
Last edited by Spedizzo; March 3rd, 2016 at 12:37 PM.
It ain't a Melissa McCarthy movie without Melissa McCarthy saying "That's gonna leave a mark!"
Just looks and feels entirely flat. The jokes are flat... the ghosts look flat... even the acting looks flat.
Last edited by VHS; March 3rd, 2016 at 6:07 PM.
The original worked because...80s.
The sequel was kinda fun.
Honestly, I'm not sure the original holds up as a timeless classic. Even more so when I look at this film. In the 80s, films could get away with more cheese and still be good. This film looks like its tried way too hard to recapture that cheese element, but the cheese in the original was a good kind of cheese. This cheese looks out of code, smells horrible, etc.
Oh well. There is always this.
Looks fine. Not great, not bad. Basically exactly what you would expect given what we already knew about the actors and director involved. I probably won't be rushing to theaters for it but I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it at some point.
Ghostbusters is perfect. Its you, Redpath, that doesn't hold up.
Thank god I'm not the only one noticing that. Same goes for The X-Files return. Revisiting stuff doesn't work when the creators have no interest in keeping cohesion with the original, but desperate fans will convince themselves there has to be some reason it doesn't make sense yet other than creative bankruptcy.
The trailer looks abysmal. The only intrigue for me is whether or not the plan to make a positive female comedy will blow up in their faces due to having a screaming black woman who drives a Cadillac. Progressive my ass.
Mike, we are not having this X-Files fight in front of the kids. This trailer is a hate crime leading to the war crime of a film.
Thought the trailer was fine, sets the basic plot, characters and tone of the movie without, and so many comedy trailers are guilty of this now, seemingly giving away all of the best laughs.
lol.
Thank god I'm not the only one noticing that. Same goes for The X-Files return. Revisiting stuff doesn't work when the creators have no interest in keeping cohesion with the original, but desperate fans will convince themselves there has to be some reason it doesn't make sense yet other than creative bankruptcy.
The trailer looks abysmal. The only intrigue for me is whether or not the plan to make a positive female comedy will blow up in their faces due to having a screaming black woman who drives a Cadillac. Progressive my ass.
Well, at least The X-Files had already been meandering since magic but selective pixies took Samantha away with all the other photogenic children...
They certainly avoided giving me any laughs.
This is why we can't have nice things, Michael.
This looks fucking heinous.
Anyone that thinks "AWW HELL NAW!" and "That's gonna leave a mark" passes for comedy in 2016 is an asshole.
Last edited by Beer-Belly; March 3rd, 2016 at 4:59 PM.
Welp, that was about what I expected. Who wants to bet Kristen Wiig's character has some kind of self esteem issue?
What grinds my gears about today's form of "comedy" is that back in the 90's/80's/70's... movies didn't have to rely on the awkward line joke. People standing around, somebody says something loud or odd... and everybody is just like "Ohh, that's awkward." That's all they have in this. Wiig's gotten by on it for years now, just standing there w/ a concerned look on her face and playing somebody that doesn't know how to be stern. And McCarthy... can't stand her.
And the ghosts themselves look all the same-ish. They're either ALL blue, ALL green, and the same copy n paste design. No diversity or creativity in them at all.
And w/ this being a reboot, it pretty much implies that this takes place in the same universe as the previous Ghostbuster movies. The opening text says X years ago they answered your call, now here's the new team. Makes no sense.
It's definately an interesting cross section between a reboot and a sequel. I'm still interested. And if it's unfunny, no big deal. Ghostbusters was my favorite movie as a child and nothing about Melissa "tries too hard" McCarthy can change that.
And I
Because otherwise I'd totally have a shot.
They didn't even get the premise of the original right. They didn't save New York, they saved the world. The rituals that took place on the roof of that building were, per Egon, designed to bring about the end of the world. I'm sure some will argue that's just a nitpick but I'm not making the damn film or its marketing material and I put more thought into it.
And yes, the CGI ghosts look incredibly bland. The effects in the original actually look better, not just in terms of design, but in not looking like someone pasted them in with Photoshop.
I didn't know Kate McKinnon is gay. Is she out? But I could see that being the case.
I'm actually pretty hyped for this after watching the trailer a few more times and letting it sink in. So basically Wiig is Egon, McKinnon is Venkman and McCarthy is Ray. I like not having McCarthy or Wiig in the zany/wild card card role, they'd be too over the top (McKinnon might be too but we'll see).
I'm not sure this film has a Peter Venkman...
Peter Venkman was a con artist and a skeptic, cynical, sarcastic and very layman to play off Egon and Ray. Just a shyster and a manipulator, but with a heart...
As Dana said in the first film, he was more like a game show host...
I was getting a little of that from Leslie Jones and the car scene, but I'm not really seeing much Peter in this movie...
#WheresThePeter
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 3rd, 2016 at 11:42 PM.
They also weren't four scientists...
They were two scientists, a psychologist and just some guy they hired. Even if you count Venkman as a self professed "fake" scientist ("Back off me, I'm a scientist!"), there is no way in hell Winston was one...
Also, it was 32 years ago...
So that was three different things they got wrong in one short sentence...
"30 years ago four scientists saved New York"
That's like Star Wars starting off with "In the distant future, in a nearby asteroid cluster..."
I'm not even mad. I'm impressed, actually. It's impressive how wrong they got that...
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 12:27 AM.
the ghost that pukes on wig is the real starof the trailer
You know what's funny?
Vomit, piss and shit...
Maybe we'll get a farting ghost that really smells when it farts, and everyone thinks Melissa McCarthy farted, but it was the ghost that farted...
Maybe the ghostbusters will get vomitted on so much that they piss themselves, because there's so much vomit...
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 12:38 AM.
I love you so much.
Bill Murray's Venkman was closer to the comedy rape nerve than any beloved comedy character ever was next to Pepe Le Pew.
Or Billy Bob Thornton in most of his archive
They very smartly subverted it when Dana was possessed, which placed Venkman in the uncomfortable position of having to shut down an evil demigod's advances...
In a reversal of expectations, he basically gets a taste of his own medicine...
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 1:11 AM.
I always liked that he was shown to be human enough to not take advantage, but still was pretty casual about drugging her. And had the drugs on him...
Yeah she's out. I think she's SNL's first openly gay cast member.
For some reason I never not thought about how odd it was that he had the drugs on him.
It is a rape scenario with no moral. Just a "don't drug rape a posessed Sigourney" PSA. Ramis was never subtle though. The government dude who investigates their illegal use of nuclear material is the real rational protagonist. Behind him is Winston who is an unqualified magical negro who asserts them as a real team. The film is just awful racist, rape approving and a bit dated in the same way Porky's made me fucking angry. Ghostbusters and Porky's value racism and misogeny as humour only Porky's could be confused for an overly obvious parody of "frat comedy". Ghostbusters confuses the idea with bad timing and telling.
Vomit, piss and shit can be riotously funny, though.You know what's funny?
Vomit, piss and shit...
Maybe we'll get a farting ghost that really smells when it farts, and everyone thinks Melissa McCarthy farted, but it was the ghost that farted...
Maybe the ghostbusters will get vomitted on so much that they piss themselves, because there's so much vomit...
How is Winston a magical negro?
Everything that Winstone says is honest or helpful. Their team got a "black survivor type" and became good at their jobs.
Explain how he isn't you gump
You realise that is a literary term and not my own two word insulting invention yeah?
Can be. Anything can be funny...
They aren't intrinsically, though...
There's a craft to it...
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 3:10 AM.
He doesn't have any special abilities, he's not wise and he doesn't save them or mentor them?
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 1:55 AM.
He's meant to be the audience's surrogate. He doesn't magically save the day. Not exactly Michael Clarke Duncan in The Green Mile, is he?
He's the naive newcomer they can explain shit to after they jump forward in time a bit...
One of Winston's primary functions in action...
He's the opposite of a magical negro...
He's just a regular guy who wanders into the craziness...
He's the normal one...
Last edited by Bill Casey; March 4th, 2016 at 2:13 AM.
How is Ghostbusters misogynistic, Seanny? Do you watch things looking for shit to be offended by?
Sigourney Weaver's Dana Barrett isn't a total bad ass like Ripley, but she's still smart and strong-willed.
Even as a kid I didn't understand what Venkman saw in Dana... she was such a bitch.
That's a trick women use to stop being constantly hit on...
No I genuinely worry I may be a bit of a misogynist sometimes but I am rarely offended by anything so blatantly against women as Venkmann is. He may be Hans Assmann(no joke look it up) on his days off. Ghostbusters is a nice film if you forgive nuclear faffing and sex crimes. Do you even remember the start of the film or do you just ignore hiring procedures and potential sexual exploitation?
So without trying I get Beer Belly "the average man's rapist" being Venkmann and you being Rick Moranis' frustrated little rapey neighbour 30 sordid years down the line. Fantastic.
You sure throw the word rape around pretty casually.
Beer Belly being from Texas makes his belief in the abuse and ownership of women a bit more understandable.
That's a nice little ad hominem attack. I like how you're completely ignoring that your bullshit about Winston being a magical negro was refuted.
I can't tell if you're just fucking around or not. Of course, I am from Texas, and we're all pretty thick.
Rick Moranis' character is childishly innocent. How you see anything devious in that character is beyond me. Venkman is a cad, but Louis Tully is just a socially awkward goober who wants people to like him.
Only a sick Texan rapist Magical Negro denialist would say that Moranis was anything other than a sex pest. He opens door after door uninvited and wont leave the poor dame alone.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
