Mr. Plinkett has a Ghostbusters 2016 review up.

[Kevin Hamilton]

For those who like Red Letter Media & wanna see them skewer that mediocre movie.

Didn't copy paste the link, but you can find it on that there channel.

And still baffled that movie inspired such rage or strong feelings of any kind. Ain't good, at all, but just forgettable

[El Cokehead del Knife Fight]

Key points

1) Just recreates the scenes of the original aimlessly and poorly
2) the constant improv is almost insulting because it makes things aimless and nothing actually sinks in
3) Ghostbusters isn't supposed to be an action movie so why would you make just this big CGI clusterf*** to cap it off
4) Why would you not make an actual script for it instead of just basically doing plot points and then having the main cast just bounce off each other for the vast majority of the film


He thinks the big failing is that Feig is not a good director or writer, he likes the main cast in the other projects they do (Melissa McCarthy he finds a bit obnoxious at times)

[Mighty Attack Tribble]

Aug 8, 2017 22:45:11 GMT -5 Kevin Hamilton said:

And still baffled that movie inspired such rage or strong feelings of any kind. Ain't good, at all, but just forgettable

Ghostbusters attained iconic status a long time ago, and people have wanted a sequel for two decades. The fact that a true sequel can never happen combined with a mediocre movie using the name and premise but little else left a lot of people feeling sore.

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

[eJm]

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

I went into that thing wanting to have fun and, hey, I had fun. Sometimes that's literally all you want from going to see a film.

[thirteen3]

STOP DANCING!

[agent817]

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

I am the same way. Now I don't think that the film will ever live up to the original two, but I'd be lying my ass off if I said that I didn't like it, because I sure as hell liked the movie. Now I will say that I enjoyed it okay the first time I saw it, and it was kind of the same when I saw it the second. But after the third and fourth times, I started to like it more. I will admit that I saw it four times in theaters, but I only paid to see it three out of those four times (The first time was for free because I had a pass to see an advance screening). I liked the movie enough to buy it (Although I question some other films I have in my personal collection, but that is a topic for another day). I still continue to defend this movie, even though I do see its flaws and I cannot wait until October when the ladies get their own comic series. And yes, that is happening and I am not talking about the current Ghostbusters 101 series.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

I love the analysis in the Plinkett videos. The side by side comparisons of the opening scenes of the original Ghostbusters and the remake is spot on.

[Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]]

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

The anger was all around too. If you hated the movie people jumped to the conclusion it was because you were sexist and hated the female casting. Not any other merit like the writing or presentation of the film. What a damn mess.

For the record halfway through watching the movie in a theatre the power went out. Like God himself was like "Enough of this shit"

[Kevin Hamilton]

Aug 9, 2017 4:10:10 GMT -5 Mighty Attack Tribble said:

Aug 8, 2017 22:45:11 GMT -5 Kevin Hamilton said:

And still baffled that movie inspired such rage or strong feelings of any kind. Ain't good, at all, but just forgettable

Ghostbusters attained iconic status a long time ago, and people have wanted a sequel for two decades. The fact that a true sequel can never happen combined with a mediocre movie using the name and premise but little else left a lot of people feeling sore.

That's true, I just never get the utter RAGE about any movies etc. Certainly one can be disappointed, but a lotta these dudes were just unhealthy with it.

Then you had defenders goin way too hard the other way as if this wasn't a lackluster comedy movie.

It'd be like if people had been polarized about say the Robocop remake etc. Not rational at all. Just the perfect storm of over the top reactions

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

Aug 9, 2017 8:29:45 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

The anger was all around too. If you hated the movie people jumped to the conclusion it was because you were sexist and hated the female casting. Not any other merit like the writing or presentation of the film. What a damn mess.

For the record halfway through watching the movie in a theatre the power went out. Like God himself was like "Enough of this shit"

No, there were some who could not stand the idea it had been recast with women. It wasn't the minority, no. But there most certainly was a portion of people who would have hated it regardless of how good the writing was. Those were the kind of people harassing Leslie Jones and whatnot.

[A Platypus Rave]

The extremes on both sides of this made everyone involved look awful.

-----

Personally, I thought the movie was awful. The casting was fine... but the writing was awful.

multiple characters had no reason to be there. Kristen Wiig, who along with McCarthy were hyped as the stars of the film, had NOTHING.

Her character could have been cut out of the movie entirely and you'd only need to change roughly 2 scenes.

McCarthy's characterization is basically "Scientist that likes soup"

I found that most if not all of the jokes weren't funny... and it fell into the same trap that a lot of remakes do by having things in the movie becuase it was in the original... but removing the context as to why.

for instance they have the Ghostbuster's answering machine being Hemsworth saying "Ghostbusters what do you want?" get it because that's how Janine answered the phone in the first movie... that one time... after she had a fight with Peter and was shown not to be the only way she answered the phone.

What's worse is they had the perfect opportunity to actually use the line later in the movie. When they go to the Not Sedgewick, Annie Potts was the receptionist, have her say "Ghostbusters? What do you want?"

There not only is it a callback, but since in the movies the ghostbusters are DISLIKED by the public at large it fits contextually as well.

Again the actresses were not the problem the fact that they had almost nothing to work with was.

Aug 9, 2017 4:10:10 GMT -5 Mighty Attack Tribble said:

Aug 8, 2017 22:45:11 GMT -5 Kevin Hamilton said:

And still baffled that movie inspired such rage or strong feelings of any kind. Ain't good, at all, but just forgettable

Ghostbusters attained iconic status a long time ago, and people have wanted a sequel for two decades. The fact that a true sequel can never happen combined with a mediocre movie using the name and premise but little else left a lot of people feeling sore.

Not to mention that Ivan Reitman was working on a sequel and had it in his contract for first refusal on anything...

and Amy Pascal went around him and basically stole the movie from him.

Not to mention Feig didn't want to do the movie and it is suspected that his "I want full control and it'll be a reboot" talk was the same tactic that Paul Heyman used in TNA... only Pascal gave it to him.

[Deleted]

Aug 9, 2017 8:29:45 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

The anger was all around too. If you hated the movie people jumped to the conclusion it was because you were sexist and hated the female casting. Not any other merit like the writing or presentation of the film. What a damn mess.

For the record halfway through watching the movie in a theatre the power went out. Like God himself was like "Enough of this shit"

I get why people were defensive.
There was a pretty ridiculous backlash from the peanut gallery about the movie and come on, a lot of it really was because the movie had a bunch of women in it (a lot of people admitted to that at the time) and people really needed to stop blaming Sony for the initial sexist geek rage.

Like Sony put a gun to their heads and made them say all that sexist shit in the first place...

Hell, I wanted to be really specific and wary about being critical of the movie when it got released because I didn't want to be lumped in with all thinly-veiled misogyny and/or the "Anti-SJW" crowd. 
Because when you're really vague but on time with what you don't like about a movie like this, you're more likely to get lumped in with the jerks. 

Besides, it's wasn't like the world was going to crumble because I had to wait a while and be really specific so as to not look like I was joining the dog pile of people rejoicing about the movie underperforming.

...now I will say the Ghostbusters comics are a lot more in line with what I expect from the Ghostbusters and at this point, I'd prefer more amazing Ghostbusters comics than them rushing a mediocre Ghostbusters sequel, but if it takes more movies to push the new team in the limelight in the comics, then that's a very small price to pay.

...and again, it's not like the Ghostbusters movie was even bad and it did give us the infinitely more interesting characters of Holtzmann and Tolan.

[Jiren]

Good review

GB 2016 was one of the worst theatrical movies I've sat through in ages.

And no it wasn't because of women (I don't mind Weig and Mcarthy is fine when handled right), it was badly written, edited & directed .

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

His re-editing of the Ed Mulgrave scene and the subway were two great examples of what went wrong with this.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Rich Evans as a Sony suit is great

[HMARK Center]

Said it in another thread, but when they posted the trailer for this review (I haven't watched the full review yet) I said in a comment I was hoping they'd focus mostly on the failures of companies like Sony in the age of reboots/sequels/franchises and the glut of nostalgia-pandering in Hollywood, etc. etc., mostly because the film wasn't great or anything, but it's not like it was that bad, just largely disposable, sort of a two star comedy with a couple funny moments and then not much else. I had a hard time seeing how to get 60-90 minutes of Plinkett material out of it.

Man, while I certainly got some decent responses over that, for some people you'd have thought I pissed on somebody's steak dinner. There were people calling it an abomination against cinema, some writing book-length responses about how awful it was, kind of coming off as if it had attacked their mothers or something, and that's where I just really stopped being able to comprehend things because, good Lord. It was a dumb comedy with a couple chuckles in it that didn't have a lot of staying power; that's it. One guy kept saying it's just like Pixels, which was a lame cash-grab that fits the same general genre as what this Ghostbusters remake was going for, but with Pixels (and a lot of other Sandler comedies of late) I could understand having a bit more of a visceral dislike toward it given that there's so damn many of them made and that a portion of their comedy involves a jarring amount of "punching down" on easy targets, which opens up its own can of worms. Ghostbusters appears to have been one and done (despite whatever rumors came out of ComiCon about other Ghostbusters projects) and nothing in its script was particularly offensive; a lot of the humor just didn't work, which isn't really something to get furious over, it just means it wasn't a strong comedy. There are countless mediocre or weak comedies, and we don't lose sleep over just about any of them.

Aug 9, 2017 8:29:45 GMT -5 Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] said:

Aug 9, 2017 4:46:17 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

I'm not going to pretend GB16 is some misunderstood comedic masterpiece or anything, but I can't lie and say me and the rest of the theater weren't laughing pretty hard at points.

It's a harmless, passable (IMO) remake to stream on a rainy weekend. The fact it drove so many people into a rage won't ever not be weird to me.

The anger was all around too. If you hated the movie people jumped to the conclusion it was because you were sexist and hated the female casting. Not any other merit like the writing or presentation of the film. What a damn mess.

For the record halfway through watching the movie in a theatre the power went out. Like God himself was like "Enough of this shit"

I kind of took a rule of thumb with the over-the-top reactions toward it, especially once it was released: there was absolutely nothing wrong with not liking this movie or not being interested in it, but if a non-professional reviewer gets worked up into a lather and rants about how badly they hated it for more than a couple of minutes, there's a decent chance they have some nasty ulterior motives.

There are so many aimless reboots/sequels out there nowadays that fall just as flat; if some people rant and rave about each of them to similar levels then I suppose they deserve points for consistency (though for their own well being should probably be advised to watch different movies), but outside of maybe(?) the last few Transformers movies there hasn't been the same sort of pure vitriol toward a lot of these other ones; I'm sure we could find a few exceptions, but likely none with the levels of controversy attached.

For those folks the anger just doesn't seem worthwhile, since it's not like this movie killed Ghostbusters as a franchise or did anything particularly controversial with its script. The originals were never coming back in the first place (RIP Harold Ramis, and Murray never wanted back in), Sony's apparently trying again with a new crew (God help us), and given how "meh" this one was it's not like people are going to stop associating the title with the 1984 film. It was here, it was gone, that's about it in the eyes of the general public. People saying "yeah, I didn't like it" are fully justified, but I question those who, like I said above, write up dissertations about everything they hated about it because they're angry somebody said "it's a two star movie" instead of "it's the worst thing ever."

[A Platypus Rave]

Aug 9, 2017 9:19:13 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

For those folks the anger just doesn't seem worthwhile, since it's not like this movie killed Ghostbusters as a franchise or did anything particularly controversial with its script. The originals were never coming back in the first place (RIP Harold Ramis, and Murray never wanted back in), Sony's apparently trying again with a new crew (God help us),

I'm guessing this is just the film Reitman was working to begin with, with cameos from the old crew (minus Ramis obviously and supposedly Murray WAS on board but Bill has the reputation of you gotta hope he shows up on that day.) before it was taken from him.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

I mentally yelled "f*** you!" at Paul Feig talking about the technology moments before Plinkett did.

[Kevin Hamilton]

Aug 9, 2017 5:25:43 GMT -5 thirteen3 said:

STOP DANCING!

Remember Scarface?