Dark Types and other Ghost types can do in Ghost types yes.
Formerly known as Bleddyn And I am feeling like a ghost Resident Perky GothBecause it's a shitty way for people to act and it drags society down.
When you start actively insulting people for being unsure of spending their hard earned money on a film you're actively hurting the industry, consumers in general and the good names of the people who worked on the film that aren't being assholes.
I care about the cast actively insulting random people with no good reason for the same reason that you care about folks on the internet insulting the cast with no good reason. That's being that we're both nosy busybodies with a mild interest in Internet drama with a mild interest in this film from both a quality perspective and a "ooh, drama in Holywood" perspective.
If the reviews come back and they're glowing I may still see this film, but I'm currently dis poisoned against it because I don't want to give assholes who treat people like shit and make massive insulting generalisations my money.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranIn this specific case there's also the problem that the fate of this movie could potentially have a big impact on what producers think about mainstream movies having a female cast. If the movie tanks because it's a legitimately bad movie like Catwoman then it's just unfortunate but if the movie tanks because the creators tainted it with bad PR... then they're not only hurting their own cause but that of others too.
edited 16th Jun '16 4:56:54 PM by Paradisesnake
Am I mistaken, or is the idea that all movies starring women get looked at harder and get more scrutiny automatically and are automatically hated because "WOMEN!" a little off base?
Did the two Pitch Perfect movies get any major scrutiny because of women dominated casts or is that written off as flying in under the radar or something to that effect? Did Elektra and Catwoman ever get major criticism just on the basis of being "Female-centric Superhero movies" beyond the obvious problems (Catwoman especially) prior to coming out and just being bad movies in general?
I'm asking as an honest question here.
edited 16th Jun '16 5:43:36 PM by TheSpaceJawa
I think at times it depends on the genre, female lead action/adventure movies get more criticism and often less funding, not only is there an inherent misogyny humble to jump with the audience but it's also there with the critics and perhaps most importantly it's there with the studios.
A middling male lead film will be seen as middling because of whatever issues it had, a middling female lead film will be seen as middling because it had a female lead, meaning that if they try and fix the film for a sequel they man can the female lead, if they simply can the film then they will write it off as another reason that female lead films shouldn't be made.
With Catwomen and Electra the lesson of them has been taken to mean that female lead superhero films can't work, the criticism within the studios and industry has focused on that they were female lead, that's why we haven't had a Black Widow film, because it's assumed that it would bomb like Catwomen did, because Catwomen's failure is written up to being due to it having a female lead.
edited 16th Jun '16 5:49:37 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranFor all the criticism Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection, not to mention the first Alien vs. Predator, get, no one's ever brought the 'protagonized by women' card against them. Granted, Ripley already had proved herself in two previous well liked movies, but the same isn't true about the AVP movie.
The problem with a Black Widow movie is very much the same as with a solo Hawkeye movie. Not enough mythology previously built about the characters' solo adventures as to establish a comic book movie franchise. Sure, they've both had a few relatively obscure solo comics, but hardly the backup material the heroes who've gotten solo films, even Ant-Man, have to their names.
edited 16th Jun '16 6:47:19 PM by NapoleonDeCheese
AVP benefitted from: 1) Ripley having set a standard for female protagonists in the Alien franchise, 2) Sanaa Lathan giving a good acting performance, and 3) people seeing the movie not because they wanted to see the human protagonist but instead the two titular monsters (about which fans did complain).
edited 16th Jun '16 7:18:50 PM by Paradisesnake
An issue too is when movies are promoted as being a female lead counterpart (or spin-off) movie, as though it was done that way for the selling point rather than feeling like the natural course of action for the movie. It's not an outright indicator of quality and doesn't really matter that much but it makes you wonder if the studio proposed the idea and went to Feig with it or if Feig came to them.
There's an interview with Max Landis online about a proposal he had for a Ghostbusters reboot. He flat out says Feig's pitch was "all women!"
That... kinda feels like it has some Unfortunate Implications to it.
Like, there are plenty of stories you could write where a cast of all women is the primary sticking point and have everything turn out well, but in this context, it feels like the pitch is, "Hey, we really need to sell this new comedy based on an old one, what would be funny and sell the show? I know! Let's make everyone women! That's it, that's the joke! That's funny and new, right?"
but HOW?The problem relating to the production (and subsequent lack of production) of female-led movies is that the industry's higher-ups are preocupied with concepts themselves rather than the application of said concepts. Their pursuit is money, if something doesn't bring money they won't try again (not for some time, anyway), and when movies of this kind fail, they blame the idea (here being the inclusion of women) rather than the application.
Kinda like R-rated animation not being made because the r-rated/nsfw note aspect itself, rather than those movies being often pointlessy filled with vulgar humor, violence, fanservice. Which makes Dora the explorer ironically more adult/mature/sophisticated than such works.
Or video game movies failling because they lack what they made the games succesful (like gameplay, or having too much plot/lore to cram in a 2 hours movie even after removing everything but the dialogue/cutscenes, or having next to no plot), going only with a similar premise.
Or poorly-received sequels killing the franchise because the lacked the original's charm, like having a crew member or a good plot. "The first one(s) was/were succesful! What went wrong? Okay nevermind, let's never touch this again."
How about the inherent implications that "all girls" should be a catch in and out of itself? The idea that the idea of having a central female cast is special enough to warrant marketing an entire film on that pitch?
That just reinforces the idea of male as default. That you couldn't just pitch a concept of an old film, but with guys now, they have to be something else. But you totally could pitch a concept of an old film, but with girls now, because that extra X chromosome counts as a personality trait.
That's not something that is going to change overnight, it's rooted far deeper into the fabric of the culture and not just the entertainment business. What does help is movies like Hunger Games and Wonder Woman that are based on pre-existing properties and movies like Lucy and Salt that are successful because of a bankable actress, none of which are marketed in any sense as "You Go, Girl!."
The problem with it being an all female cast is that a lot of the problems I've got with it, I'd still have whoever was in the roles. The trailer wasn't very funny, not very scary, the effects weren't all that convincing... the stereotyping etc. would be just as problematic if it was a man not a woman. The film just doesn't look very good at all, it's that simple.
But now because of a minority of MRA idiots and the makers of the film itself you can't criticise the film or express any doubts without it derailing into a 'sexism' debate within about 30 seconds.
"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."Hell I think you could do an all female Ghostbusters reboot quite well with the right casting and writing. But none of that is present here.
Grab a Comically Serious nerdy type and a excitable nerdy type and pair them with some one snarky, lewd, and honest type who will drive the movie. Someone like Sarah Silverman maybe. With the down to earth 'this is crazy' snarky outsider coming in later.
The most important thing is no one tries too hard to be funny, the funny is limited to just snark and funny stuff that happens in actually pretty serious situations. With none of those stereotypes seen in the trailer like that 'I'm a big loud sassy black woman, it's funny!' person.
Also make it scary and atmospheric when ghosts are involved... That's like rule number 1 that the trailer failed at.
edited 18th Jun '16 2:18:27 PM by Memers
Yeah the original Ghostbusters mixed and matched the brightly colored, ethereal glowing ghosts like Slimer with the traditional horror creatures like the demon form Librarian Ghost. All the ghosts in the new movie look to be pretty uniform in appearance, very saturated colors and with a cartoony design.
Briefly glanced at the Ghostbusters 2016 actress interview in this month's Entertainment Weekly, wherein one section, the interviewer asked the girls what they remembered most from the original film. Leslie Jones responded by saying Sigourney Weaver. Funny, while I do remember the character Dana, I keep forgetting that Sigourney played her, or was even in the original film until she shows up or I read the cast listing. I know, I know, it's a strange thing. Hey, don't judge!
edited 18th Jun '16 8:44:44 PM by Shippudentimes
You know what's darkly hilarious about what some of this movie's apologists said? If you combine all of them...
It's wrong to have doubts about this movie.
It's wrong to express critical opinion.
It's wrong to be angry when you are insulted.
It's wrong to call out racism and sexism.
Thankfully, nobody ever said all of that at once, because holy shit, it would be almost downright Orwellian.
edited 18th Jun '16 11:45:38 PM by dRoy
Continuously reading, studying, and (hopefully) growing.Seriously? Accusing "film apologists" of Orwellian mind control? If ever anyone needed evidence that the outrage against this film has overinflated to ridiculous proportions, look no further than that post.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.

Why did I type Grimer? I did indeed mean Slimer but I guess a Freudian Slip is trying to show just how bad I am at Ghostbuster knowledge.
edited 16th Jun '16 3:21:25 PM by Ecrivan
Formerly known as Bleddyn And I am feeling like a ghost Resident Perky Goth