Ghostbusters reviews are...positive!

[maninahat]

Well well well, well well well well well. After what feels like a decade of bickering, the reviews are finally coming in for the new Ghostbusters and it looks like the critics like it. Sitting at 77% fresh The Rottentomatoes consensus summary is: "Ghostbusters does an impressive job of standing on its own as a freewheeling, marvelously cast supernatural comedy -- even if it can't help but pale somewhat in comparison with the classic original."

As one of the people who simultaneously defended the movie, all the while grimacing at some seriously dire trailers, I'm pleasantly surprised. In light of the appraisals, are people going to actually watch it now? And more to the point, what is the audience response going to be?

 

[DefunctTheory]

In the other, locked thread, I got a bit snarky about being right that it was a soulless failure. I'll take this chance to apologize for being wrong, and not doing my part to double check the sources provided in the thread.

That being said, no, I wont see it. I've seen other movies with Melissa Carthy starring that were rated highly by critics and viewers alike, and I disliked them all. I assume this will be the same, so I'll still pass. Congrats to the people who do like her, though.

 

[The Lunatic]

https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/4s6of5/ghostbusters_2016_review_megathread/d573ypg

Oddly, it seems there's a fair correlation between those who defended the movie (And called people sexist) before it came out and then gave it a positive review.

Don't have much opinion on it myself, but, I'd put it under "Interesting, if true".

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

I have no interest in seeing this movie, I will probably not see this movie but holy hell people are pissed about it getting good review, because god forbid people have a people have a different opinion than you even the ones that say it's OK, they must be taking bribe.

I mean holy hell you people come down.

 

[Catfood220]

I am conflicted...

First thing off the bat, I have no problem with the Ghostbusters being women, women can do whatever they want, if they want to bust ghosts then so be it. It actually adds an interesting spin on the franchise.

The thing that made me hate the new Ghostbusters film was the trailers. Oh my God, those fucking trailers. I don't know if they deliberately put the worse bits in the trailers just to wind people up and to generate more heat for the film by getting people like me to hate them. Because, I really hate those trailers.

But, now that critics are coming out and saying that the film is quite good, and it is a lot of critics saying its good, they can't all be wrong. I am actually tempted to go and see it and see for myself. I may get some opinions of actual people who see it before I commit myself to it, but yeah, I'm tempted.

 

[davidmc1158_v1legacy]

I still have no interest in seeing it. There have been quite a few movies that have gotten good/great reviews that I still don't like. Such as pretty much any movie Michael Cera, Will Ferrel, or Melissa Mccarthy have ever been in. This movie has Melissa Mccarthy and seems to feature the style of humor that appears in her films. Thus, I do not want to see it.

If other people do want to see it, then fine, enjoy yourselves. I just will not be joining you.

 

[Terminal Blue]

So yeah, apparently a lot of people are very angry about the fact that a movie they haven't actually seen but assumed was going to be bad is actually reviewing well (and, anecdotally, proving popular with audiences).

Maybe, just maybe, it's time for these people to admit that their problem isn't that "the trailers weren't very good".

I don't know if they deliberately put the worse bits in the trailers just to wind people up and to generate more heat for the film by getting people like me to hate them.

The problem is that the people who market movies often have an.. oddly specific concept of who actually watches their movies. This is particularly true when marketing films which are expected to have a big appeal with children.

There are a few obvious examples of this.. but the British trailer of Wall-E stands out. Just about everything Dreamworks does could fall into this category too, which was appropriate back when Dreamworks were just the shit pixar but is less so now they're making genuinely good stuff.

 

[Cap'nPipsqueak]

Because, I really hate those trailers.

Mobile homes are even worse. Someone brings the equivalent to a bus though the city, blocking off roads and taking up a dozen parking spaces. And drags their car behind them.

If you need that much space, why not just stay at home?

 

[Fox12]

In the other, locked thread, I got a bit snarky about being right that it was a soulless failure. I'll take this chance to apologize for being wrong, and not doing my part to double check the sources provided in the thread.

That being said, no, I wont see it. I've seen other movies with Melissa Carthy starring that were rated highly by critics and viewers alike, and I disliked them all. I assume this will be the same, so I'll still pass. Congrats to the people who do like her, though.

I'm not so sure you're wrong. Quite a few of the critics I read seemed to have a bone to pick with YouTube "trolls." Very few actually seemed to find the film funny, which... Makes me wonder what they were looking for. It just sounds mediocre.

Personally, making a middle of the road adeptation of a classic film is about the worst thing you can do.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Hrm ... might give it a looksee. I wasn't really yay or nay for a new GB film. I mean, is it a problem that I merely found the originals entertaining rather than good? If it's just as entertaining, and RT seems to suggest as such, it makes no difference to me who's using modified toasters to imprison spectres from beyond the grave.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Spoiler

In the other, locked thread, I got a bit snarky about being right that it was a soulless failure. I'll take this chance to apologize for being wrong, and not doing my part to double check the sources provided in the thread.

That being said, no, I wont see it. I've seen other movies with Melissa Carthy starring that were rated highly by critics and viewers alike, and I disliked them all. I assume this will be the same, so I'll still pass. Congrats to the people who do like her, though.

I'm not so sure you're wrong. Quite a few of the critics I read seemed to have a bone to pick with YouTube "trolls." Very few actually seemed to find the film funny, which... Makes me wonder what they were looking for. It just sounds mediocre.

Personally, making a middle of the road adeptation of a classic film is about the worst thing you can do.

There is, I suppose, a possibility that when it gets a wide release, and after a week or to, the wider reviews will show a different picture. But at this time, my gloating was uninformed and inappropriate. As of now, it's being well received.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

There is, I suppose, a possibility that when it gets a wide release, and after a week or to, the wider reviews will show a different picture. But at this time, my gloating was uninformed and inappropriate. As of now, it's being well received.

HOW DARE YOU BE OKAY WITH PEOPLE LIKING IT. Your supposed to call everyone who's thinks it's at least OK dumb, sjw or taking bribes. HOW DARE YOU!/s

(seriously go read some of those comments on videos saying it was ok, it kind of sad.)

 

[Cap'nPipsqueak]

Okay Sky, could you nuke this one on principal too?

I blame the living.

That means you as well, of course.

Also me, but only out of a sake of fairness. Normally I'm beyond such things.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Oddly, it seems there's a fair correlation between those who defended the movie (And called people sexist) before it came out and then gave it a positive review.

That's the boat I'm in. Just feels a little odd the people who were determined to give it a good review regardless of quality gave it a good review, and everyone thinks its legit.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

So in the end, a majority of the (non-sexist) flack the movie received came from the fact that whoever edited the trailers has no business advertising feature films? Makes sense, considering how much executive meddling and creator backlash against said meddling I hear happens in Hollywood these days.

Maybe I'll put this in my ever-increasing 5 year movie backlog.

 

[Derekloffin]

Unfortunately, given all the politics of this movie, it is one of those movies that I'll just have to ignore reviews for on both sides. The haters are determined to hate it, but the defenders are determined to find it worthy at all costs. This means I can't know if the politics are shaping the reviews or not.

 

[mecegirl]

Even without seeing the film I'm calling it now. I'd bet all this back and forth is over a movie that will most likely be an ok summer blockbuster. It won't be shit, it won't be the best coming out this summer, but it will be ok. Which with hollywood's record is pretty much all one can expect. If it is remembered at all it will because of the controversy.

 

[McMarbles]

"These people who disagree with my preconceived opinion must have had a preconceived opinion! How dare they!"

You're not even trying to hide your hypocrisy anymore.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Well well well, well well well well well. After what feels like a decade of bickering, the reviews are finally coming in for the new Ghostbusters and it looks like the critics like it.

I'll be the voice of dissent here for shits n' giggles. A 70-80% film on Rotten Tomatoes isn't exactly glowing acclaim. It's "alright". Usually territory occupied by middling inoffensive slop, or polarizing films. Of further concern, the film is currently sitting just above 50% among Top Critics, picking up most of its acclaims from less reliable/experienced outlets (I'll let the local conspiracy widgets speculate about which ones, and why, I'd like to think I have more dignity than that). This is more in keeping with the 62% on Metacritic, which uses weighted scores.

Even a 60% should be considered a win for the film considering the woeful (and merited) reception of the first two trailers, and it's more evidence of a "meh" reaction then the cinematic scarring a lot of the film's detractors were expecting, but I wouldn't wrap a bow around it and say "the critics like it" any more than I agreed with the last thread suggesting they hated it. I anticipate a rather tepid comedic outing that is carried...when it works...by the charisma of its leads, and workmanlike direction from Feig.

As pointed out in the previous thread, the original film only carries a 67% on Metacritic. This is based on a terribly small sample size of only 7 critics, but it's worth noting that films history remembers as cultural touchstones/unassailable classics aren't always as highly regarded in their day. This was touched on briefly during the furor over Force Awakens, when it was pointed out that "Empire Strikes Back" was raked by critics upon release for being "derivative" of the original film.

None of that is to suggest Feig's Ghostbusters is going to be remembered 30 years from now as being some kind of genre classic, merely to point out that simply throwing numbers around gleaned off a review aggregate site or a couple of choice review quips doesn't add up to a whole lot if you're genuinely trying to parse community response to a particular piece of media. RT especially is known to be problematic due to its binary method of determining "quality" and the fact it's owned by a company whose sole purpose for existing is selling film tickets.

 

[axlryder]

curious. I don't think I'll see it, but that's mostly because I don't have time to physically go see movies anymore. I might give it a rent though.