Ghostbusters (2016)

Diacanu · Jul 11, 2016

Kevin Smith likes and recommends it.
I'm avoiding his review though, because it contains spoilers.

Time to make a spoiler review folder for the weekend....

Diacanu · Jul 12, 2016

Some Reddit-ers got caught plotting to troll positive critics with "Sony pays you!", accusations.

Look, if you're pissed if a movie stinks, that's one thing.
If you're pissed that a movie's GOOD?
Pure mental illness. You need pills.

Paladin · Jul 12, 2016

I'm old school. If a movie doesn't appeal to me, I just sorta, y'know, don't go see it.

I don't get all Genghis Khan about it, "I don't like it so it must fail!!!" If you enjoy it, hey, knock your self out.

As for the new Ghostbusters, I liked the original but wasn't a huge fan (maybe that's why I'm not as defensive about it as some people my age) and the new film is getting decent reviews, so I'm probably going to see it.

Volpone · Jul 13, 2016

Well, I'm happy for you that it looks like the rumor that the reviews were embargoed until release day turned out to be untrue. I was starting to get the feel that it was a real stinker. I mean, the reviews aren't stellar. Basically "an OK popcorn movie," but 76+% Fresh is not to be sneezed at.

Of course it really doesn't make a lot of difference. It still isn't a movie that interests me and I'm sure you'd have still enjoyed it even if the critics said it was terrible.

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Richard Roeper's take....

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

‘Ghostbusters’ reboot a horrifying mess

"Ghostbuster" stars Leslie Jones (from left), Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon. | SONY

Richard Roeper
@richardroeper | email
So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

Let’s go ahead and issue the obligatory SPOILER ALERT. Later in this review, I WILL be discussing the nature of the cameos by some of the cast members from the original “Ghostbusters.” You’ve been warned.

The 2016 edition of “Ghostbusters” is not a sequel or a remake per se. While there are multiple visual and musical nods to the 1984 classic (to the point of distraction), this is a stand-alone disaster. (One indication this story takes place in the same universe occupied by the original Ghostbusters: We catch a glimpse of a bust of the late great Harold Ramis’ Egon Spengler character.)

In present-day New York City, Kristen Wiig’s Erin is an uptight academic trying to distance herself from her college days when she and her best friend Abby (Melissa McCarthy) published a book claiming ghosts were real. Erin and Abby are estranged — but they’re reunited via plot device when honest-to-ghostness apparitions surface in New York, creating all sorts of evil mischief.

Wiig and McCarthy co-starred in “Bridesmaids” (directed by the usually terrific Paul Feig, who is at the helm here) and they’re enormously charismatic and versatile screen actors — which makes it all the more disappointing to see them flounder separately and together here. They’re both surprisingly muted and flat.

Then again, better understated than insanely over-the-top, which is what we get from Kate McKinnon as Holtzmann, the “wacky” scientist of the bunch. McKinnon is so good on “Saturday Night Live,” but she absolutely butchers her performance in this film — mugging for the camera, bouncing around in an exaggerated manner as if she’s in a “Three Stooges” short, and drawing attention to herself even when a scene calls for her to react and not engage in wholesale attention-getting thievery.

Jones is loud and unsubtle as an MTA worker named Patty who becomes the fourth Ghostbuster, but I’m not sure there’s a way to deliver lines such as, “Aw, hell naw!” without going big.

There’s very little chemistry between any combination of the four Ghostbusters, who spend a lot of time strategizing about their next move and then saying “Woohoo!” when they hit the streets.

Chris Hemsworth further drags down the proceedings as their receptionist, Kevin, who’s monumentally stupid — but also narcissistic and annoying. Hemsworth tries too hard to be funny, instead of creating a legitimately funny character. (It doesn’t help matters that Wiig’s Erin is so smitten with this dope she can barely think straight around him.)

As for those wildly hyped cameos by original “Ghostbusters” cast members Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and Annie Potts — and once again, SPOILER ALERT! They don’t play older versions of their characters. They’re just wedged into the story as irrelevant, plot-stopping cameos. Dan Aykroyd saying “I ain’t afraid of no ghosts” isn’t a clever homage to the original; it’s a self-conscious and cloying wink that serves no real purpose.

The special effects in “Ghostbusters” are so mediocre I’m wondering if they’re a nod to the relatively crude effects of 1984. (Or maybe they’re just not very good.) The ghosts aren’t frightening and they’re not funny and they have almost no backstory; they’re just hissing, hateful, murderous creatures storming through the city.

Neil Casey plays the movie’s main villain, a creepy hotel janitor named Rowan. He’s one of the most forgettable villains of any movie I’ve ever seen. I’m already forgetting his name as I finish this paragraph.

Andy Garcia does what he can with this role as the mayor of New York, who is in deep denial about the whole ghost thing. (It’s a pale imitation of William Atherton’s fantastic work as Walter Peck, the EPA official who tried to shut down the Ghostbusters in the 1984 film.)

From multiple visual references to the iconic logo to a new take on the catchy Ray Parker Jr. (by way of Huey Lewis) theme song to the appearance of some very familiar ghosts to the aforementioned cameos, “Ghostbusters” keeps telling us: Yes, we know we’re revisiting a classic.

Some things are better left alone.
Click to expand...

Not sure now whether to go or not.

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

Who cares, baby?

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

http://time.com/2827094/ghostbusters-reviews/

This has all happened before...

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Diacanu said: ↑

Who cares, baby?

Click to expand...

You. More than anyone here. You even started a Red Room thread over it.

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Diacanu said: ↑

http://time.com/2827094/ghostbusters-reviews/

This has all happened before...

Click to expand...

Ironically the NYT likes the new version.

Shirogayne · Jul 13, 2016

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Richard Roeper's take....

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

‘Ghostbusters’ reboot a horrifying mess

"Ghostbuster" stars Leslie Jones (from left), Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon. | SONY

Richard Roeper
@richardroeper | email
So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

Let’s go ahead and issue the obligatory SPOILER ALERT. Later in this review, I WILL be discussing the nature of the cameos by some of the cast members from the original “Ghostbusters.” You’ve been warned.

The 2016 edition of “Ghostbusters” is not a sequel or a remake per se. While there are multiple visual and musical nods to the 1984 classic (to the point of distraction), this is a stand-alone disaster. (One indication this story takes place in the same universe occupied by the original Ghostbusters: We catch a glimpse of a bust of the late great Harold Ramis’ Egon Spengler character.)

In present-day New York City, Kristen Wiig’s Erin is an uptight academic trying to distance herself from her college days when she and her best friend Abby (Melissa McCarthy) published a book claiming ghosts were real. Erin and Abby are estranged — but they’re reunited via plot device when honest-to-ghostness apparitions surface in New York, creating all sorts of evil mischief.

Wiig and McCarthy co-starred in “Bridesmaids” (directed by the usually terrific Paul Feig, who is at the helm here) and they’re enormously charismatic and versatile screen actors — which makes it all the more disappointing to see them flounder separately and together here. They’re both surprisingly muted and flat.

Then again, better understated than insanely over-the-top, which is what we get from Kate McKinnon as Holtzmann, the “wacky” scientist of the bunch. McKinnon is so good on “Saturday Night Live,” but she absolutely butchers her performance in this film — mugging for the camera, bouncing around in an exaggerated manner as if she’s in a “Three Stooges” short, and drawing attention to herself even when a scene calls for her to react and not engage in wholesale attention-getting thievery.

Jones is loud and unsubtle as an MTA worker named Patty who becomes the fourth Ghostbuster, but I’m not sure there’s a way to deliver lines such as, “Aw, hell naw!” without going big.

There’s very little chemistry between any combination of the four Ghostbusters, who spend a lot of time strategizing about their next move and then saying “Woohoo!” when they hit the streets.

Chris Hemsworth further drags down the proceedings as their receptionist, Kevin, who’s monumentally stupid — but also narcissistic and annoying. Hemsworth tries too hard to be funny, instead of creating a legitimately funny character. (It doesn’t help matters that Wiig’s Erin is so smitten with this dope she can barely think straight around him.)

As for those wildly hyped cameos by original “Ghostbusters” cast members Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and Annie Potts — and once again, SPOILER ALERT! They don’t play older versions of their characters. They’re just wedged into the story as irrelevant, plot-stopping cameos. Dan Aykroyd saying “I ain’t afraid of no ghosts” isn’t a clever homage to the original; it’s a self-conscious and cloying wink that serves no real purpose.

The special effects in “Ghostbusters” are so mediocre I’m wondering if they’re a nod to the relatively crude effects of 1984. (Or maybe they’re just not very good.) The ghosts aren’t frightening and they’re not funny and they have almost no backstory; they’re just hissing, hateful, murderous creatures storming through the city.

Neil Casey plays the movie’s main villain, a creepy hotel janitor named Rowan. He’s one of the most forgettable villains of any movie I’ve ever seen. I’m already forgetting his name as I finish this paragraph.

Andy Garcia does what he can with this role as the mayor of New York, who is in deep denial about the whole ghost thing. (It’s a pale imitation of William Atherton’s fantastic work as Walter Peck, the EPA official who tried to shut down the Ghostbusters in the 1984 film.)

From multiple visual references to the iconic logo to a new take on the catchy Ray Parker Jr. (by way of Huey Lewis) theme song to the appearance of some very familiar ghosts to the aforementioned cameos, “Ghostbusters” keeps telling us: Yes, we know we’re revisiting a classic.

Some things are better left alone.
Click to expand...

Not sure now whether to go or not.
Click to expand...

Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy.

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Richard Roeper's take....

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

‘Ghostbusters’ reboot a horrifying mess

"Ghostbuster" stars Leslie Jones (from left), Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon. | SONY

Richard Roeper
@richardroeper | email
So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

Let’s go ahead and issue the obligatory SPOILER ALERT. Later in this review, I WILL be discussing the nature of the cameos by some of the cast members from the original “Ghostbusters.” You’ve been warned.

The 2016 edition of “Ghostbusters” is not a sequel or a remake per se. While there are multiple visual and musical nods to the 1984 classic (to the point of distraction), this is a stand-alone disaster. (One indication this story takes place in the same universe occupied by the original Ghostbusters: We catch a glimpse of a bust of the late great Harold Ramis’ Egon Spengler character.)

In present-day New York City, Kristen Wiig’s Erin is an uptight academic trying to distance herself from her college days when she and her best friend Abby (Melissa McCarthy) published a book claiming ghosts were real. Erin and Abby are estranged — but they’re reunited via plot device when honest-to-ghostness apparitions surface in New York, creating all sorts of evil mischief.

Wiig and McCarthy co-starred in “Bridesmaids” (directed by the usually terrific Paul Feig, who is at the helm here) and they’re enormously charismatic and versatile screen actors — which makes it all the more disappointing to see them flounder separately and together here. They’re both surprisingly muted and flat.

Then again, better understated than insanely over-the-top, which is what we get from Kate McKinnon as Holtzmann, the “wacky” scientist of the bunch. McKinnon is so good on “Saturday Night Live,” but she absolutely butchers her performance in this film — mugging for the camera, bouncing around in an exaggerated manner as if she’s in a “Three Stooges” short, and drawing attention to herself even when a scene calls for her to react and not engage in wholesale attention-getting thievery.

Jones is loud and unsubtle as an MTA worker named Patty who becomes the fourth Ghostbuster, but I’m not sure there’s a way to deliver lines such as, “Aw, hell naw!” without going big.

There’s very little chemistry between any combination of the four Ghostbusters, who spend a lot of time strategizing about their next move and then saying “Woohoo!” when they hit the streets.

Chris Hemsworth further drags down the proceedings as their receptionist, Kevin, who’s monumentally stupid — but also narcissistic and annoying. Hemsworth tries too hard to be funny, instead of creating a legitimately funny character. (It doesn’t help matters that Wiig’s Erin is so smitten with this dope she can barely think straight around him.)

As for those wildly hyped cameos by original “Ghostbusters” cast members Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and Annie Potts — and once again, SPOILER ALERT! They don’t play older versions of their characters. They’re just wedged into the story as irrelevant, plot-stopping cameos. Dan Aykroyd saying “I ain’t afraid of no ghosts” isn’t a clever homage to the original; it’s a self-conscious and cloying wink that serves no real purpose.

The special effects in “Ghostbusters” are so mediocre I’m wondering if they’re a nod to the relatively crude effects of 1984. (Or maybe they’re just not very good.) The ghosts aren’t frightening and they’re not funny and they have almost no backstory; they’re just hissing, hateful, murderous creatures storming through the city.

Neil Casey plays the movie’s main villain, a creepy hotel janitor named Rowan. He’s one of the most forgettable villains of any movie I’ve ever seen. I’m already forgetting his name as I finish this paragraph.

Andy Garcia does what he can with this role as the mayor of New York, who is in deep denial about the whole ghost thing. (It’s a pale imitation of William Atherton’s fantastic work as Walter Peck, the EPA official who tried to shut down the Ghostbusters in the 1984 film.)

From multiple visual references to the iconic logo to a new take on the catchy Ray Parker Jr. (by way of Huey Lewis) theme song to the appearance of some very familiar ghosts to the aforementioned cameos, “Ghostbusters” keeps telling us: Yes, we know we’re revisiting a classic.

Some things are better left alone.
Click to expand...

Not sure now whether to go or not.
Click to expand...

Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy.
Click to expand...

So you've seen the movie and can confirm it's good?

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.c...-secret-life-of-pets-in-advance-ticket-sales/

Shirogayne · Jul 13, 2016

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Richard Roeper's take....

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

‘Ghostbusters’ reboot a horrifying mess

"Ghostbuster" stars Leslie Jones (from left), Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig and Kate McKinnon. | SONY

Richard Roeper
@richardroeper | email
So bad.

“Ghostbusters” is a horror from start to finish, and that’s not me saying it’s legitimately scary.

More like I was horrified by what was transpiring onscreen.

How could so many talented, well-meaning artists, who clearly loved and respected the original, produce such a raggedy-looking, thuddingly unfunny, utterly unnecessary reboot?

For months, controversy has swirled around the new “Ghostbusters” movie. The trailer was reportedly the most hated in YouTube history, for what that’s worth (or not worth), which led to some pundits saying some of that hate was rooted in sexism.

Others said the fact the Leslie Jones character wasn’t a scientist and seemed to have a role that called for her to play into stereotypes smacked of racism.

Of course, people were voicing these opinions without having seen the entire movie. Well, I have seen it — and while I believe the concerns about racial stereotypes were overblown, “Ghostbusters” is one of the worst movies of the year for multiple other reasons, including:

Bad acting.

Uninspired directing, editing, cinematography and music.

Cheesy special effects.

A forgettable villain.

A terrible script.

Let’s go ahead and issue the obligatory SPOILER ALERT. Later in this review, I WILL be discussing the nature of the cameos by some of the cast members from the original “Ghostbusters.” You’ve been warned.

The 2016 edition of “Ghostbusters” is not a sequel or a remake per se. While there are multiple visual and musical nods to the 1984 classic (to the point of distraction), this is a stand-alone disaster. (One indication this story takes place in the same universe occupied by the original Ghostbusters: We catch a glimpse of a bust of the late great Harold Ramis’ Egon Spengler character.)

In present-day New York City, Kristen Wiig’s Erin is an uptight academic trying to distance herself from her college days when she and her best friend Abby (Melissa McCarthy) published a book claiming ghosts were real. Erin and Abby are estranged — but they’re reunited via plot device when honest-to-ghostness apparitions surface in New York, creating all sorts of evil mischief.

Wiig and McCarthy co-starred in “Bridesmaids” (directed by the usually terrific Paul Feig, who is at the helm here) and they’re enormously charismatic and versatile screen actors — which makes it all the more disappointing to see them flounder separately and together here. They’re both surprisingly muted and flat.

Then again, better understated than insanely over-the-top, which is what we get from Kate McKinnon as Holtzmann, the “wacky” scientist of the bunch. McKinnon is so good on “Saturday Night Live,” but she absolutely butchers her performance in this film — mugging for the camera, bouncing around in an exaggerated manner as if she’s in a “Three Stooges” short, and drawing attention to herself even when a scene calls for her to react and not engage in wholesale attention-getting thievery.

Jones is loud and unsubtle as an MTA worker named Patty who becomes the fourth Ghostbuster, but I’m not sure there’s a way to deliver lines such as, “Aw, hell naw!” without going big.

There’s very little chemistry between any combination of the four Ghostbusters, who spend a lot of time strategizing about their next move and then saying “Woohoo!” when they hit the streets.

Chris Hemsworth further drags down the proceedings as their receptionist, Kevin, who’s monumentally stupid — but also narcissistic and annoying. Hemsworth tries too hard to be funny, instead of creating a legitimately funny character. (It doesn’t help matters that Wiig’s Erin is so smitten with this dope she can barely think straight around him.)

As for those wildly hyped cameos by original “Ghostbusters” cast members Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and Annie Potts — and once again, SPOILER ALERT! They don’t play older versions of their characters. They’re just wedged into the story as irrelevant, plot-stopping cameos. Dan Aykroyd saying “I ain’t afraid of no ghosts” isn’t a clever homage to the original; it’s a self-conscious and cloying wink that serves no real purpose.

The special effects in “Ghostbusters” are so mediocre I’m wondering if they’re a nod to the relatively crude effects of 1984. (Or maybe they’re just not very good.) The ghosts aren’t frightening and they’re not funny and they have almost no backstory; they’re just hissing, hateful, murderous creatures storming through the city.

Neil Casey plays the movie’s main villain, a creepy hotel janitor named Rowan. He’s one of the most forgettable villains of any movie I’ve ever seen. I’m already forgetting his name as I finish this paragraph.

Andy Garcia does what he can with this role as the mayor of New York, who is in deep denial about the whole ghost thing. (It’s a pale imitation of William Atherton’s fantastic work as Walter Peck, the EPA official who tried to shut down the Ghostbusters in the 1984 film.)

From multiple visual references to the iconic logo to a new take on the catchy Ray Parker Jr. (by way of Huey Lewis) theme song to the appearance of some very familiar ghosts to the aforementioned cameos, “Ghostbusters” keeps telling us: Yes, we know we’re revisiting a classic.

Some things are better left alone.
Click to expand...

Not sure now whether to go or not.
Click to expand...

Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy.
Click to expand...

So you've seen the movie and can confirm it's good?
Click to expand...

I never said that.

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

Finally, a video to go with Elle King's "Good Girls".

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

Adam Ray's Slimer audition.

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Richard Roeper's take....

http://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-reboot-a-horrifying-mess/

Not sure now whether to go or not.
Click to expand...

Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy.
Click to expand...

So you've seen the movie and can confirm it's good?
Click to expand...

I never said that.
Click to expand...

So in other words you're superficially joining the "anyone who questions it is a loser" bandwagon, without knowing whether or not it's a good movie. In other words, just like Dicky, you're on the other side of the coin...but still deciding how valid attitudes are without knowing how good the movie is. Sad.

Shirogayne · Jul 13, 2016

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy.
Click to expand...

So you've seen the movie and can confirm it's good?
Click to expand...

I never said that.
Click to expand...

So in other words you're superficially joining the "anyone who questions it is a loser" bandwagon, without knowing whether or not it's a good movie. In other words, just like Dicky, you're on the other side of the coin...but still deciding how valid attitudes are without knowing how good the movie is. Sad.
Click to expand...

No.

Come back to me when you pass Dinner's level of reading comprehension.

El Chup · Jul 13, 2016

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

So you've seen the movie and can confirm it's good?
Click to expand...

I never said that.
Click to expand...

So in other words you're superficially joining the "anyone who questions it is a loser" bandwagon, without knowing whether or not it's a good movie. In other words, just like Dicky, you're on the other side of the coin...but still deciding how valid attitudes are without knowing how good the movie is. Sad.
Click to expand...

No.

Come back to me when you pass Dinner's level of reading comprehension.

Click to expand...

I think that's a task for you, since I have been more than open to give this movie a chance the past couple of pages. It's you and Dicky who are more interested in just plowing on with the bullshit.

Shirogayne · Jul 13, 2016

Well, gee, you got me, here's what I posted:

"Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy."

And here's what I meant:

"Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy."

Simply put,I wouldn't look to him for ANY film advice any more than I would look to @Stewey for how good the latest episode of Enterprise was.

And if the film is a critical failure, my life will go on the same as it did after the prequel series, and Catwoman and every Fantastic Four flick.

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

Anna said: ↑

I never said that.
Click to expand...

So in other words you're superficially joining the "anyone who questions it is a loser" bandwagon, without knowing whether or not it's a good movie. In other words, just like Dicky, you're on the other side of the coin...but still deciding how valid attitudes are without knowing how good the movie is. Sad.
Click to expand...

No.

Come back to me when you pass Dinner's level of reading comprehension.

Click to expand...

I think that's a task for you, since I have been more than open to give this movie a chance the past couple of pages. It's you and Dicky who are more interested in just plowing on with the bullshit.
Click to expand...

....and I'll never have that recipe agaaaaaiiinn!! Ohhh nooooo!!!

Amaris · Jul 13, 2016

Anna said: ↑

Well, gee, you got me, here's what I posted:

"Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy."

And here's what I meant:

"Richard Roeper hates goddamn everything. I never cared for the guy going back to his early days as Gene Siskel's replacement. The guy is a humorless twat, not just for this film, but most others I've gone on to enjoy."

Simply put,I wouldn't look to him for ANY film advice any more than I would look to @Stewey for how good the latest episode of Enterprise was.

And if the film is a critical failure, my life will go on the same as it did after the prequel series, and Catwoman and every Fantastic Four flick.
Click to expand...

Oh gods, yes. Richard Roeper was such an awful replacement for Gene Siskel. I never enjoyed his reviews, even when I would agree with him, because he just sucked the fun out of everything.

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

No Ghostbusters in China.
But, the other two didn't go over there either, so...

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.c...-ghostbusters-is-definitely-afraid-of-ghosts/

gul · Jul 13, 2016

Goldstein the Space Jew said: ↑

So in other words you're superficially joining the "anyone who questions it is a loser" bandwagon, without knowing whether or not it's a good movie. In other words, just like Dicky, you're on the other side of the coin...but still deciding how valid attitudes are without knowing how good the movie is. Sad.
Click to expand...

Um, no, she expressed a long standing gripe with the reviewer, meaning that the review might be suspect. That's just sharing information.

Paladin · Jul 13, 2016

Seeing it tomorrow at 9:45pm. In IMAX 3D and in the reserved seating auditorium with the recliners.

If it's good, I'll be happy. If it isn't, life goes on.

Diacanu · Jul 13, 2016

Paladin said: ↑

Seeing it tomorrow at 9:45pm. In IMAX 3D and in the reserved seating auditorium with the recliners.

If it's good, I'll be happy. If it isn't, life goes on.
Click to expand...

Ahh, ya lucky bastid.

Paladin · Jul 13, 2016

HighDefDigest liked it pretty well: http://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/ghostbusters-2016-movie-review/

Diacanu · Jul 14, 2016

To the "Harold Ramis is rolling in his grave", crowd (if we have any here) I'll just leave this right here.

http://splitsider.com/2016/07/on-my...ostbusters-torch-to-a-new-generation-of-fans/

Paladin · Jul 14, 2016

Certified fresh at RottenTomatoes.

Diacanu · Jul 14, 2016

60% with top critics.

Diacanu · Jul 14, 2016

Very cool interview with Ivan Reitman.

http://www.vulture.com/2016/07/ivan-reitman-ghostbusters-bill-murray-qa.html

Log in or Sign up

Ghostbusters (2016)

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Volpone Zombie Hunter

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Amaris Guest

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

gul Revolting Beer Drinker Administrator Formerly Important

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Log in or Sign up

Ghostbusters (2016)

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Volpone Zombie Hunter

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

El Chup Fuck Trump Deceased Member Git

Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Amaris Guest

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

gul Revolting Beer Drinker Administrator Formerly Important

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Paladin Overjoyed Man of Liberty

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

Useful Searches