Ghostbusters Trailer - Holy s#!t, how is it this bad?

[Vigormortis]

It's funny that...you should mention...Reboot...
http://www.legendariummedia.com/2015/06/08/corus-mainframe-rebooting-reboot/

Oh....oh.....oh gods, that....that sounds awful. Holy shit, just.....AWFUL.

I don't think I've seen a series reboot that so completely misunderstood the essence and flavor of the original series it was based on as much as this one has. It's like they decided to take yet another terrible tween Disney show and slap the ReBoot name on it.

Reading that synopsis literally made me cringe.

 

[Vigormortis]

In my opinion, people bashing this trailer either don't remember the original Ghostbusters or are just pissed that this movie has four female protagonists.

I remember the original Ghostbusters. I remember the tone and the aesthetic. I remember the good things and the bad things.

I was also emphatically onboard with initial idea for this 'reboot'. I was perfectly fine with the idea of a gender-bent new cast telling a new version of the story. I was even excited to see what became of it.

But after learning that Paul Feig was writing and directing, that they picked a rather lackluster lead cast, that the production (based on the set photos) looked amateurish and cheap, my optimism faded. Now, after seeing this awful trailer, I've come to the conclusion that the final film will be terrible.

Could I be wrong? Of course. But how dare you and those like you paint me with the broad brush of "sexist" just because I had the audacity to dislike what is, in my and many other's opinions, a terrible trailer.

If this trailer had been exactly as it is, but (ironically) gender-bent to star Adam Sandler and his crew, I wonder if you'd be claiming that people only hate the trailer because they're too blinded by nostalgia or because they hate men.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

McKinnon and Jones were the only two who looked like they were playing their actual characters. It's not Jones' fault that her character was written as most stereotypical and unneeded black lady ever. Whereas McKinnon looks like she is having genuine fun with the role of crazed engineer. The gun scene could have been salvaged had they had the guns charged and licking them caused a mild static electricity effect in her hair, thus reinforcing the not altogether there engineer effect. Those two issues alone show poor writing. Wiig looks like she is distracted from acting the part properly because of a permanent wedgie, and they just have McCarthy replay her exact same role from her last 4 movies rather than write her a part that demands she acts. The fact of the matter is that regardless of the actresses they cast, this movie was a failure from the script forwards.

Being fair to the writers, and I'm giving them a lot of fairness, I don't think McCarthy has any range beyond the roles she's played previously. Its why I extremely dislike her as an actress and comedian. I say this a lot but I have to reiterate it, John Candy was a comedian who happened to be fat and never relied on his weight as a comedy crutch. McCarthy is a fat comedian, and leans heavily (no pun intended) on her weight to draw her comedy. Its absolutely sad how people hold her up as a pioneer of empowering overweight folks as comedians when we've got the best example in the late John Candy.

As far as Wiig goes, she looks like she doesn't want to play the part but had to honor her contract. She's so far above the material as presented its ridiculous.

For me, I'm not sold on Paul Feig's movies. The last few he's done were flops and Bridesmaids wasn't my cup of tea (but some people enjoyed it and I won't fault them for it). But it really feels like the weight of the movie's intended success is strictly relying on the gender-swapping (how it was initially marketed) and trying to recapture the popularity of Bridesmaids. As well as relying on Ghostbusters nostalgia.

Edit: The reason the original worked was due to the entire cast being top-level comedians and actors, the writing was top-notch and it wasn't really written as a comedy it just happened to work that way because of the cast.

 

[Solbasa]

...This was supposed to be a comedy?

I kid, of course. I can at least see how some people could find some of the things here funny. Just didn't resonate particularly well with me.

In all seriousness, it just seemed like a fairly generic lighthearted action movie trailer, complete with the limp slapstick and mostly unfunny (to me, at least) jokes. Effects were nice, but other than that I think the entire affair just seems overwhelmingly "meh".

 

[Fox12]

You have to love this predictable thread, full of pure internet outrage. "OH MY GOD THIS TRAILER IS THE WORST THING SINCE HITLER OMG OMG I CAN'T EVEN."

I can. Take some deep breaths and grow up.

Um, all I've seen is lukewarm disapproval. If you were looking to be the judgemental dude in the middle of a flame war, you've missed your opportunity. You should have commented on the Conker thread. You'll just have to wait a week for the next controversy. There doesn't seem to be one here.

OT: yeah, this looks bad. The next one will be bad too. Maybe after two failures they'll let the franchise die, instead of beating a dead horse. I'm tired of Hollywood bringing franchises back to life. I'm done. I don't have the spirit for this sort of thing anymore.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

You have to love this predictable thread, full of pure internet outrage. "OH MY GOD THIS TRAILER IS THE WORST THING SINCE HITLER OMG OMG I CAN'T EVEN."

I can. Take some deep breaths and grow up.

Um, all I've seen is lukewarm disapproval. If you were looking to be the judgemental dude in the middle of a flame war, you've missed your opportunity. You should have commented on the Conker thread. You'll just have to wait a week for the next controversy. There doesn't seem to be one here.

OT: yeah, this looks bad. The next one will be bad too. Maybe after two failures they'll let the franchise die, instead of beating a dead horse. I'm tired of Hollywood bringing franchises back to life. I'm done. I don't have the spirit for this sort of thing anymore.

I assume the meltdowns are happening elsewhere, mate... 'Cause I'm not seeing 'em.

I just see honest assessment of a trailer. I mean... Other than Wyvern trying to assign those who disapprove of it their motivations, it's been very amicable, and we largely seem to agree that it looks like it's going to be a disappointment.

Still, no need to let that get in the way of feeling superior.

 

[NoeL]

For anyone skipping to the end and want to get to get the goods quick, I encourage you to find Something Amyss' posts earlier in the thread - they nailed pretty much every beat.

But to reiterate:
* The trailer is terrible. This is evident by the fan recut actually making the movie look ok.
* By extension, and by virtue of what's IN the trailer, the movie itself also looks to be poopy. Soulless, corporate cash grab.
* Despite these things, the reception is absolutely amplified by the anti-feminist blowhards that have been hating on this movie for no good reason since its inception. This is evident by similarly bad trailers for similarly nostalgic licenses receiving significantly less attention.
* The black chick's character isn't racist, just (portrayed as) annoying, stereotypical and lazy.


Also, regarding the character of Winston, not only did he serve as the audience stand-in that Ramis and Akroyd could spout exposition at (they had Murray for that too), but he served one of the film's deeper themes by being a devout Christian (in contrast to the irreligious/atheistic scientists). Ghostbusters was, in part, about saying "Fuck religion". They stand toe-to-toe with a GOD and win. Movie Bob gives a great explanation in his Really That Good [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPoILjs6BYI] analysis of the film (I highly suggest watching it if you haven't already).

Ghostbusters was a hit for much the same reasons Robocop was. Not only was it cool as shit, but it had some deeper and not unintelligent subtext. Will this reboot be the same? We can't know from the trailer, and modern Hollywood reboots don't have the best history, but with the same production crew from the original film who knows. Have to wait and see (though my money's on "No").

 

[Fox12]

You have to love this predictable thread, full of pure internet outrage. "OH MY GOD THIS TRAILER IS THE WORST THING SINCE HITLER OMG OMG I CAN'T EVEN."

I can. Take some deep breaths and grow up.

Um, all I've seen is lukewarm disapproval. If you were looking to be the judgemental dude in the middle of a flame war, you've missed your opportunity. You should have commented on the Conker thread. You'll just have to wait a week for the next controversy. There doesn't seem to be one here.

I get the sneaking suspicion that you didn't read the thread, but I also have this overwhelming lack of giving a shit about pursuing this.

Well, thank you for letting us know that. We would have know idea unless you'd taken the time to inform us.

Spoiler

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

You have to love this predictable thread, full of pure internet outrage. "OH MY GOD THIS TRAILER IS THE WORST THING SINCE HITLER OMG OMG I CAN'T EVEN."

I can. Take some deep breaths and grow up.

I think you wish this was the case.


You say this:

You have to love this predictable thread, full of pure internet outrage. "OH MY GOD THIS TRAILER IS THE WORST THING SINCE HITLER OMG OMG I CAN'T EVEN."

I can. Take some deep breaths and grow up.

...On the first page.

And there's no great outrage before this post to be seen. Just "this looks bad" and "this doesn't look so bad"... Pretty moderate stuff. I mean... You typed it, so there's a record of the sequence of events if anyone would care to look back and see how much you're bullshitting here.


Seriously 22 posts prior to this, and nothing like you describe. Perhaps yours is the predictable response.

I get the sneaking suspicion that you didn't read the thread, but I also have this overwhelming lack of giving a shit about pursuing this.

Ah. "I half know that I'm the one blowing things out of proportion here, so please don't ask me to back up what I'm saying". Got it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Being fair to the writers, and I'm giving them a lot of fairness, I don't think McCarthy has any range beyond the roles she's played previously.

I don't know. Having watched her prior to her movie "success," I'ma say she has range. It's hard to say how much, because all we normally get are cookie cutter movie appearances. And I'm not out to defend her as a brilliant actress, but I think she's been pretty heavily typecast.

Plus, almost nothing in the trailer looked good, so it's hard to not blame this either on writing or direction. Someone actually thought her making faces or "The power of pain" were strong decisions.

Oh, and ghost vomit.

If maybe just her presence fell flat, then I think we could blame her. But when everyone sucks, or close to it, it's time to look at the people in control.

I remember watching Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and thinking "you know, some of these actors are really skilled and have a long acting career. That tells me that someone told them to chew the scenery this badly, and thought it was a good decision."

I get a similar vibe out of this trailer. But that could be on whoever made the trailer, too.

 

[visiblenoise]

I didn't think it was good or bad. Did you have expectations for it or something?

 

[Musou Tensei]

I didn't think it was good or bad. Did you have expectations for it or something?

I had hopes that they don't completely fuck it up, just a pandering rule 63 movie with good effects, but this is a travesty.

 

[frizzlebyte]

Ghostbusters sucked. I don't know why everyone is so worked up about a sequel and women and blah blah blah. It was just not my cup of tea. The whole concept was average at best. Yes, there I said it.

And I'm going to be one of the few people who semi-agree with you, actually. I think what made it so good when I watched it (I remember it being popular-culture when I was real little, though my parents thought it might bother me to see it then, and I just never saw it til a couple years ago), was the chemistry of the actors. They played off each other's strengths to make the movie work. I also have a thing for Sigourney Weaver, so there's that, I guess...

I think if it had been any other actors in the ensemble, it simply wouldn't have worked, but the acting carried it through.

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

Ghost busters was not good because of the premice or setting, it was good because they had bill Murray and dan on the same screen. Not surprising at all that bad comedians cannot fill their shoes.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Ghostbusters sucked. I don't know why everyone is so worked up about a sequel and women and blah blah blah. It was just not my cup of tea. The whole concept was average at best. Yes, there I said it.

And I'm going to be one of the few people who semi-agree with you, actually. I think what made it so good when I watched it (I remember it being popular-culture when I was real little, though my parents thought it might bother me to see it then, and I just never saw it til a couple years ago), was the chemistry of the actors. They played off each other's strengths to make the movie work. I also have a thing for Sigourney Weaver, so there's that, I guess...

I think if it had been any other actors in the ensemble, it simply wouldn't have worked, but the acting carried it through.

I only got around to watching it around 5 years ago, so I went into it hearing for years how good it was by people.

Yes, the performances by the actors really the bright glowing star of the whole piece but otherwise, it's a completely forgettable film. Staypuft Marshmellow man rampaging through the city not withstanding, but even that is only seared into my conscious cause it was shown a lot on the Muppet babies.

 

[frizzlebyte]

snip

Well, don't get me wrong, I liked the premise of the movie, as well, but I can see how going into it having heard all the hype about it could be off-putting. I just happened to catch it one day on HBO and enjoyed the diversion.

The original Alien is my "wut?" movie. After hearing about how awesome it is for years, finally seeing it was like "You mean THIS is what people are all worked up about? Wut?" :-/

Blade Runner is another one. Cool movie, sure, but not worth all the hype, IMO.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

snip

Well, don't get me wrong, I liked the premise of the movie, as well, but I can see how going into it having heard all the hype about it could be off-putting. I just happened to catch it one day on HBO and enjoyed the diversion.

The original Alien is my "wut?" movie. After hearing about how awesome it is for years, finally seeing it was like "You mean THIS is what people are all worked up about? Wut?" :-/

Blade Runner is another one. Cool movie, sure, but not worth all the hype, IMO.

Fucked up thing is, Alien 3 was my first Alien and I freaking loved that movie

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Being fair to the writers, and I'm giving them a lot of fairness, I don't think McCarthy has any range beyond the roles she's played previously.

I don't know. Having watched her prior to her movie "success," I'ma say she has range. It's hard to say how much, because all we normally get are cookie cutter movie appearances. And I'm not out to defend her as a brilliant actress, but I think she's been pretty heavily typecast.

Plus, almost nothing in the trailer looked good, so it's hard to not blame this either on writing or direction. Someone actually thought her making faces or "The power of pain" were strong decisions.

Oh, and ghost vomit.

If maybe just her presence fell flat, then I think we could blame her. But when everyone sucks, or close to it, it's time to look at the people in control.

I remember watching Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and thinking "you know, some of these actors are really skilled and have a long acting career. That tells me that someone told them to chew the scenery this badly, and thought it was a good decision."

I get a similar vibe out of this trailer. But that could be on whoever made the trailer, too.

Thats true in a lot of ways. But I also subscribe to the idea that an actor with range and talent can rise above the material and direction to put on a good performance. For all the crap people give Nicolas Cage, the man has been able to turn in some amazing performances in some otherwise shit movies. Jeremy Irons managed to take a horribly written and directed film in Dungeons and Dragons and deliver perhaps the best possible camp performance in film history. Its awful but its masterfully awful, the type of awful only a skilled actor could pull off.
If McCarthy were worth her weight (ok that was kind of a cheap shot) in acting, she could rise above the poor direction and writing as presented in the trailers. There's still every chance the movie could be good, but honestly I'm not confident in her or Paul Feig's work in general. I love to give people the benefit of the doubt, and try not to prejudge things but there's so much working against the film that I don't know if it could work out in the end. It may end up being a financial success but I'm seriously doubting the critical aspect will be successful. Not with the honest critics who aren't judging the film by a PC standard.
I don't have anything against female empowerment, and I absolutely support it under the right conditions. This move falls under tokenism in my view, and ultimately harms the idea rather than supports it. The way it was marketed before any material was released has proven to me that the concept is absolutely shallow and harmful to the overall idea. I hope to be proven wrong. Desperately hope.

 

[Combustion Kevin]

If you make a movie trying to create a comedy, people will judge it by it's comedy.
If you make a movie to fulfill a political agenda, people will judge it by it's political agenda.