Stupid ex-ghostbuster pissed that there making a real ghostbusters sequel

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/ghostbusters-reboot-star-is-very-unhappy-about-the/1100-6464519/

yeah so this black lady I dunno her name is upset because her movie sucked and now there trying to make a real sequel to the original with bill murray and stuff and shes outa the job so shes pissed and yeah. These people just need to realize there movie sucked there out they had a shot and failed. THe movie flopped and was hated by fans of series.

What a big baby, and she’s gotta throw in that standard procedure Trump reference I guess. Still it won’t be ghostbusters without Harold Ramis.

Looks like Milo was right. She’s an unfunny idiot. And the nerve of her to bring up Trump and force her tweet to be adored by the simple minded Left.

Why would anyone want a sequel to the original anyway? They missed their chance five years ago when Harold Ramis (Egon) died.

So glad their doing a real Ghostbusters. Bottom line is $$ talks and that pandering trash didn't do well.

Who gives a shit about the "another fake reboot/sequel/remake/sons"

A Ghostbusters without Bill Murry and the Orginal cast is and never will be a Ghostbusters.

@ProtossRushX:

I'm upset about that too but a real sequel to the original is still awesome.

The closes thing we'll ever gonna get to a Ghostbusters 3 was the Ghostbusters video game from 2009. Now that was our true sequel.

Was just about to post this. And yea you're right, that basically is the GhostBusters sequel people wanted, interactive no less. You get to be the Mary Sue.

In regards to the movie, I don't care. The 'cast and left-media will try contort this into something woman hating, but it simply wasn't good nmovie. Redlettermedia does a superb job of breaking down why it sucked.

They are doing the same with Robocop, the last movie failed, try again.

That 100% does not require a reboot, it didn't require sequels either. Murphy is human again, that's the arc, the end.

I still not see all female one. It really so bad?

Yup :)

A shame that Billy was such a massive pain and somehow felt that he couldn´t do another Ghostbusters, and look at him now, it´s not like studios are standing in line to hire him.

True story, after posting the above, this was the first article I found on google news.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/01/16/jason-reitman-ghostbusters-3-sony-jumanji-star-wars-halloween-jurassic-world-box-office/#5b09cc995942

Imagine the worst SNL sketch ever made, and then imagine it drawing on for 1 hour and 20 min.

That is how bad the all-female Ghostbusters was.

And to be clear the problem is not the cast, it´s the script, the guy who made this script should be fired and never be allowed to work in Hollywood again.

@uninspiredcup:

He is satire reviewer, lol.

@uninspiredcup: i've watched that Ghostbusters half in the bag more times than i'd like to admit, it was so spot on...and Mike was so drunk...one of their best yet.

@iwilson1296:

It a joke reviewer. It for click bait. He not even believe what he say.

@x_karen_x: no clickbait but there are jokes, and half in the bag is another parts of redlettermedia

@iwilson1296:

His review are meant to be skits. His character is like a whiner fanboy who complain about everything in the movie.

The movie is worse than your grammar.

@SOedipus:

Ha ha it must be so bad that it good!

Give it a shot. I loved the first two movies, so even though this wasn't the Ghostbusters I wanted, I still watched it. Granted, it's a far cry from what the originals were, but there are some redeeming qualities to it, such as the aesthetic being perfect. The humor, however, not really befitting of a Ghostbusters film.

@JustPlainLucas: How are the aesthetics perfect in the 2016 film?!?

Regardless of what you think of the movie, it's instantly recognizable as a Ghostbusters film. The costumes, the ghosts, the special effects, the weapons and equipment, the Echo-1.

It's pretty good. The female cast wasn't a problem in the slightest though. The problem is they tried to make it a comedy. The original was so good because it wasn't trying to be a comedy. It was a spooky movie that had just enough natural humour.

It's better than the trash fire that was Ghostbusters 2. Everyone is super quick to forget how awful that movie was.

@JustPlainLucas: Yeah gotta disagree with you there. Etco 1 looks like retarded shit, the equipment they use is all over the place and doesn't fit usually, the ghost also,looked somehow worse. The o,my thing that looked Ghostbusters were the costumes, but even if they had nailed the aesthetics (which they didn't) it wouldnt have mattered with how horrible the script, special effects and attempted humor were.

What's wrong with Ghostbusters 2? It's basically a remake a 1, granted. But it still has it's moments.

I can't really think of a "good moment", from the reboot.

If she had an ounce of self-respect and humility she'd come out and say that this was a good move because her movie was shit.

Has nothing to do with feminism, Trump, and anything like that.

What? Are we supposed to make movies simply out of principle now? Like "Hey, this movie will probably suck, but it has a feminist theme, so let's go ahead and take a multi-million dollar risk that likely won't pay off and make this movie".

Some people do think like that, and it's in games as well. I think people are smart enough to tell when it's forced and artificial as well, usually backlash against it and get called pieces of shit in the process, justly or unjustly.

I'm really sure why they think this is exclusive to Ghostbusters though.

Robocop, Point Break, Ben Hur. All these remakes bombed either critically or commercially with fans disliking them, including writing them off as soon the as first trailer fired up. Generic manly men. As mentioned their dropping Robocop as well, having another stab at it. Because money moneys.

Fans tend to be quite belligerent to reimaginings or new takes regardless of what it is. Especially if the original material is cherished with nostalgia.

A good recent exception is Broly, very few cinema showings, but alot of men grow up watching that show as a kid. That too, sort of does act like a soft-reboot to the series, redoing past-events and changing a non-canon character, but it has involvement from the original creator and doesn't discard what made it appealing in the first place. If anything it's reinvigorated the franchise.

I am neutral to Ghostbusters in general. I just don't understand why everything and its mother gets a reboot. Even Reboot got a reboot, and that looked like it sucked big-time.

As far as the money goes, movies with minority & female leads have been doing gangbusters at the box office lately, e.g. Black Panther, Crazy Rich Asians, Wonder Woman, Jumanji, Bohemian Rhapsody, Aquaman, Spider-Verse, etc.

I'm afraid you won't get another Ghostbusters like the 1984 movie. For starters, Harold Ramis passed away.

And Ghostbusters 2 wasn't as good as the original film.

I just don't think anyone can pull off another classic Ghostbuster movie. Lack of imagination, lack of good directing, lack of proper actors, etc. Whatever the causes, I just don't see another classic Ghostbusters movie happening.

I didn't see the 2016 reboot, but it doesn't surprise me its not as good as the original. That movie looked way different, with an all-female cast even. I can't believe Leslie Jones actually mentioned Trump. I read her comment and the whole remark was such an ignorant thing to say. Maybe Jason Reitman liked the original movies better? The original movies represent the Ghostbusters brand better I think. The 2016 reboot was a drastic difference and not everyone is going to like it best. Jason Reitman, like many people, probably simply liked the Bill Murray movies more.

Believe it or not, nobody sets out to make a shitty movie (except maybe The Asylum). Regardless of how it turned out, they tried to make a good movie. Yes, the Ghostbusters reboot chose to have an all female cast (and a lot of people wrote it off as soon as they heard that) but the fact that the film wasn't that great doesn't mean the filmmakers were making a film out of principle, it means they failed at making a great film. Ocean's 8 also replaced an almost entirely male case with female characters and it did pretty well, because it was a pretty fun film to watch (for yet another heist movie).

It's not fan backlash over being remakes that killed these films. It's that they were crappy films. If you make a decent film, and you market it successfully, people will watch it. Obviously what people like is subjective and not everyone will like and dislike the same things, but the general consensus about the remakes you mentioned is that they were just not great films. I saw Point Break and it was one of the dumbest films I'd seen in a long time, regardless of what source material it's supposed to be related to. I didn't catch Ben Hur, but while Robocop wasn't terrible I can certainly see why it wasn't a success. The Total Recall remake was basically a 2 hour chase scene with none of the cool sci-fi and social themes of the first one.

But by comparison, Dawn of the Dead (2004) did pretty well (108 mil off of a budget of 28) because even though it's horror which is generally a less popular genre it was actually a genuinely creepy film (before Zack Snyder started to get too far up his own ass with his "style"). There are lots of remakes out there that are actually good, and in some cases those are the films that people start to remember as the "original". The 1986 version of The Fly, the 1988 version of The Blob, the 1991 version of Cape Fear, John Carpenter's The Thing. Hell, even the "original" 2001 Ocean's Eleven is a remake. Remakes (like non-remakes) do well then they are decent films. They don't necessarily have to be high art, but they have to be good at what they are trying to do and all of these are examples of that.

-Byshop

I watched the reboot last year and I personally only found one of the characters likeable and that was Kristen Wiig as Erin. Kate Mckinnon as Jillian was a real try hard and I absolutely can't stand Melissa McCarthy in anything as she always plays the exact same role. The second Chris Hemsworth comes along to play this really stupid fool who can't do anything right I knew where it was going.

You'll never have the GB3 movie you so desire without Harold Ramis anyway, I've heard the GB video game was pretty much GB3 but I've never played it.

@Jag85: The funny thing is 4 of those movies were created from already established characters. There is a difference in making something like Black Panther and Wonder Women( already established characters) and then taking something like Ghostbusters, robocop or terminator and just doing race and gender swaps.

It's nothing wrong with creating something original with people of color and female leads. But to just race and gender swap established characters has almost always consistently failed.

PS: The guy from Bohemian Rhapsody looks like a white dude. And Jumani is led by " The Rock" who everybody loves.

It’s hilarious, her attitude about this is the exact reason her own film is so hated, it's embarrassing. The movie itself is okayish, but it was the attitudes of the cast members before it was even out that completely killed the film for me.

While I understand it sucks for her that she doesn't get to make another blockbuster and she got unfairly harassed, she needs to realize quicksmart that the reason this is happening isn't because of the team. Whether the team is male, female or both is irrelevant, it always has been. What matters is the writing and direction, nobody really wanted a Ghostbusters remake, they wanted a true sequel AKA Ghostbusters 3. They had all the pieces in place to deliver a sequel film with all the nostalgia trimmings of the original cast reprising their roles and passing the torch to a new generation team for setting up their own franchise. Instead they delivered a terrible remake that was only going to be directly compared to the original. At least with a sequel/soft reboot of the franchise, they would have helped audiences ease into it with the familiarity of the original characters, not the same actors in completely different roles making the audience wish they were seeing them as Ghostbusters instead. She unfortunately signed up for a project destined for failure because of this which fans saw coming from miles away. Ghostbusters 2016 should have been title: "Extreme Ghostbusters" and it would have been somewhat fine.

And finally about Leslie Jones. I personally don't like her at all. (not hate her mind you) She comes off as a sassy stereotype Black Woman which rubs me the wrong way, she's too damn sassy for my taste and her attitude is crap.

I'll say one addendum to my earlier post, and that is that you can have a remake be torpedoed strictly by the fact that it's a remake (regardless of the quality of the film) and that's if the remake is basically a carbon copy of the original and brings nothing new to the table. A good example would be the Gus Van Sant Psycho remake. I haven't seen it, and I'm sure it's probably at least a decent film (because it's a shot by shot remake of the original Hitchcock classic). But the question is... why? What was the point of literally making the exact same movie over again? Nobody really cared, the original hinged on a surprise twist ending that pretty much everyone already knows, so who was this for? It had a pretty meager budget by Hollywood standards and even still it barely made back half of it.

-Byshop

First, her social media diatribe is so stereotypical that it isn't even funny but it is highly embarrassing for a supposed adult. Two, I think the casting of said actors and their abilities do need to be addressed. Bad script and writing aside, the appropriate actress could give a great performance but that isn't case with this film or so many have said. Three, a trailer is released in order to entice a potential customer and none of the trailers I saw for this film made me want to see it in a movie theater, on television or anywhere. Four, back to the cast but the fat girl (thinner now) from Spy as well as Mike & Molly is not funny in a lead position or any position. The television program was laughable because of the Italian step-father, trampy sister, the husband and his cop partner, etc.., She was not good. In Spy it was the guy playing Aldo and that Jason guy who made it have laughs.

Movie companies make films to in order to reap big bucks and not to make an actress happy as in this case.

That review was as bad as the movie and holy cow that voice.

I hope it´s a spoof voice and the review is made to mimic how bad the movie was because if someone actually runs around with a voice like that one youtube, anyone can be big.

Don´t ever watch the psycho remake, it´s a horrible movie and it´s no wonder it was done at 1 which bombed terribly at the box office

There is only one Hitchcock and only one Anthony Perkins, and Vince Vaughn is no Perkins all respect to him though, he is good in True Detective but he can´t act for shit when it comes to roles like Norman Bates.

It´s almost like if they remade Scarface or Godfather, even if they took it "script" for "script", they can´t reproduce the actors who made the roles iconic, the script is nothing without the actors/actress to make it come to life.

@Jacanuk:

All his review are satire but people think he being serious. I say before, his character it meant to be of a movie snob who complain and nitpick thing especially in their most favorite films.

They did.

Fair enough. I can't comment on the quality of it because I haven't seen it but it's not hard to imagine that even as a direct replica it's inferior. But even if it were exactly as good as the original, it would still suck because what's the point?

-Byshop

You are 100% on the nose there. What is the point? I understand that some directors and money-men have trouble finding new ideas and therefore think "hey let´s make a remake" because they think that will make them easy money. But they always seem to forget that it´s not the script alone that makes a good movie, it´s the actors as well.

But if you find it on Netflix or some other streaming service you should watch it though, judge for yourself if you are bored one day.

Ahh ok thanks for the info.

Was not sure with it being youtube and all, but it couldn´t be anything else :) that voice would not even get 10 viewers to watch anything.

@Jacanuk:

It have like a million view?

Yep, as a spoof :) it´s like spoof channels like the one with "actual reviews" and such, people love a joke even a bad one

I heard ISIS uses the ghostbusters remake to torture people.

@x_karen_x:

If you try to watch the Ghostbusters reboot just for fun, it is fine! Don't listen to those haters. It's not amazing or near where the old movies were but it was AT LEAST good.