It makes sense for Holtzman to experiment with a lot of different designs simultaneously and see what works, rather than putting all your eggs in one basket by giving the same design to everyone.
Ehhh. I'm not going to discredit your opinion. But for me the movie wasn't very fun. I keep saying it again and again that I feel like everyone who enjoyed the movie saw a different movie than I did.
And despite a thirty plus year record of mega fandom for the franchise this movie actually killed my buzz. If the franchise is going to lose its soul and just be like every other modern comedy I think I may just be done with the franchise in general. I mean I will still watch the old ones all the time and watch my RGB DVDs with my kids. But as far as wearing my logo wear and my flight suit etc. I think I am done for a while.
And I can't understate how that really shakes me to my core.
It makes sense for Holtzman to experiment with a lot of different designs simultaneously and see what works, rather than putting all your eggs in one basket by giving the same design to everyone.
I wish all the people who recently started to care, over the past few years, about women in film, would have went to see the Witch while it was in theaters.
Ehhh. I'm not going to discredit your opinion. But for me the movie wasn't very fun. I keep saying it again and again that I feel like everyone who enjoyed the movie saw a different movie than I did.
And despite a thirty plus year record of mega fandom for the franchise this movie actually killed my buzz. If the franchise is going to lose its soul and just be like every other modern comedy I think I may just be done with the franchise in general. I mean I will still watch the old ones all the time and watch my RGB DVDs with my kids. But as far as wearing my logo wear and my flight suit etc. I think I am done for a while.
And I can't understate how that really shakes me to my core.
Yeah, that's quite possibly much more of a subjective issue than a problem with the move
I have a hard time articulating this to people, but the original film is more than just my all-time favorite movie.
Ghostbusters hit theaters almost exactly a year after I was born. It was fresh on cable when I was forming my first freakishly early memories. I would insist on trying to watch it, then be scared into nightmares regularly and often for the first six years of my life. And the same with sequel. I had action figures and toys and a proton pack (with the foam neutron stream). I could quote the entire movie by the age of eight, and had always gotten most of the jokes.
My best friend and I, both in our early- and mid-30's now, can essentially live out entire work days by dealing with them through GB quotes. He's kind of pissed by the new movie.
I just saw A Different Ghostbusters. Not lesser, but different.
But that's been a lot of my nerdsperience; I literally learned to read through Marvel comics. The first song lyrics I memorized were the Spider-Man theme. I wore a Spidey action figure on my highschool graduation mortar board. In 1999, Marvel actually authorized my band to use the band name The Righteous Spider-Men, in writing. I've still got the email from their legal department.
But these things live on
Peter Parker becomes Miles Morales; Spengler becomes Holtzman; Bruce Banner becomes David Banner becomes Bruce again.
Someday, John McClaine becomes Jenna; Axle Foley becomes Alejandro; Luke becomes Rey and Han becomes Finn
Our childhood can never be destroyed by somebody else's- only made greater by bringing joy to a new generation. If GB16 doesn't hold up on rematch, I can throw my pour a glass of scotch and throw in my copy of the original. And we all remember the lyrics to our favorite theme songs.
If you're worried you'll forget about your favorite things, here's a test: MagicPrime! What is best in life!?
I wonder how much of this reboot was based around the evolution of New York itself. Because I'm not a native New Yorker, but I'm sure that a bunch of SNL cast members asking themselves "What does New York mean to me?" today would have a very different answer from people asking that same question in the 1980s.
A lot of people say they miss the dry humor of the original, but a lot of that might be due to how much the city has changed. I'm sure that the cast of "Hot Fuzz" could probably knock a reboot of Ghostbusters out of the park, but then it wouldn't be New York anymore.
Another big shift in the reboot is that the original movie tries to make ghostbusting a blue collar activity with blue collar goals: Exterminate ghosts for $$$. The reboot turns ghostbusting into an academic activity with academic goals: Find proof that ghosts exists. Which is probably a lot more realistic. In the original movie, they go straight from seeing one single ghost in the library to deciding to go into business around Ghostbusting, where they develop all their equipment and build a containment system before they even have any idea what the market is. It only works because Bill Murray is basically a charlatan rather than a true believer, who treats his job as more of a con than a legitimate service.
The librarian ghost from the original is also just a gaping plothole in general. Like, here's definitive proof that ghosts are real, and all you have to do is visit the library to check it out. Why isn't that bigger news? Also, why don't they bother testing their equipment on the librarian?
+2
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
I wonder how much of this reboot was based around the evolution of New York itself. Because I'm not a native New Yorker, but I'm sure that a bunch of SNL cast members asking themselves "What does New York mean to me?" today would have a very different answer from people asking that same question in the 1980s.
Not much from the original was based on 1980's New York. There's the mayor and there's the throwaway line that the firehouse is in a DMZ, while these days even East New York is getting gentrified, but the rest of the film is around the UWS or the Plaza hotel on 5th. Areas that have become safer since the 80s, but haven't really changed their character, not like Williamsburg or TriBeCa or the like. Ghostbusters 2 was more NYC culture-centric, but the less said about that movie, the better.
Changes are probably more due to different comedic leads, having four main characters instead of three, and more general trends in comedy writing. Three beat comedy skits don't lend themselves to either subtlety or letting jokes breathe.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I kinda liked Patty's vacuum shredder. I hated the punch glove. The other weapons ranged from cool to fine, but the issue was the world building. The original just laid out the rules to catching ghosts so clearly. You hold them steady with the proton stream, you trap them in a field unit, you contain them in a specially built storage facility. It was so intuitive and just looked so convincing that my mind will no longer accept that you can just shoot a ghost to make it go away. Especially when this was reinforced with the original video game and the cartoons, it's just more interesting.
That is true, this remake needs to make ghost-rules more clear. I mean, one ghost gets taken out (or carried away, I'm not quite sure) by a subway train, and a ghost-balloon gets popped by a swiss army knife. The proton beams seem to be used like whips... And I think they only used the ghost-traps once for that gargoyle ghost; otherwise they just... whipped them into the ground or something?
I mean it didn't diminish my enjoyment of the movie, but world-building is fun. Especially since they clearly want to expand this into a franchise; this should have been the ground-rules movie.
I kinda liked Patty's vacuum shredder. I hated the punch glove. The other weapons ranged from cool to fine, but the issue was the world building. The original just laid out the rules to catching ghosts so clearly. You hold them steady with the proton stream, you trap them in a field unit, you contain them in a specially built storage facility. It was so intuitive and just looked so convincing that my mind will no longer accept that you can just shoot a ghost to make it go away. Especially when this was reinforced with the original video game and the cartoons, it's just more interesting.
For me them just throwing the ghosts around was very lazy. On a shallow level maybe people thought it was a good action scene. But I couldn't help but think that they should have done something more clever than just devolve into a CGI acid trip.
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.
Then you know
These things that you love will always be unspoiled
You know
The riddle
Of steel
This line of posts seems funny to me because they actually did try a Conan remake in 2011 and it was a flop.
It seems pretty clear to me that there have been many, many terrible remakes of cult 80s films hoping to rake in that nostalgia money. And just like Conan (2011), Total Recall (2012), and Robocop (2014); Ghostbusters (2016) is bad movie that will have a weak response and be ultimately forgotten.
Many people who have invested a lot in the politics of an all woman cast are trying to interpret this in a different way, and I'm sorry, but I don't think your view is based on objective fact. I don't mean this as an insult, it's easy to become blinded by issues important to us, but we need to step back a bit here.
BTW, I've wanted to post my opinion to this effect since the thread started but was intimidated from doing so by the "FUCK THE HATERS! This movie is doing SO well despite those sexists! Fuck anyone saying anything to the contrary!" sentiment earlier in this thread. It feels like only now, as political fervor cools, and box office results are coming in with cold, objective numbers to back up negative reviews that it's safe to openly critique the film.
And that's something else I think we need to step back from.
+2
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
How is the movie being bad an objective fact? I didn't give a shit about the politics of the movie, but went in expecting a sub par remake, and instead found a thoroughly enjoyable movie.
This line of posts seems funny to me because they actually did try a Conan remake in 2011 and it was a flop.
It seems pretty clear to me that there have been many, many terrible remakes of cult 80s films hoping to rake in that nostalgia money. And just like Conan (2011), Total Recall (2012), and Robocop (2014); Ghostbusters (2016) is bad movie that will have a weak response and be ultimately forgotten.
Agreed.
Many people who have invested a lot in the politics of an all woman cast are trying to interpret this in a different way, and I'm sorry, but I don't think your view is based on objective fact. I don't mean this as an insult, it's easy to become blinded by issues important to us, but we need to step back a bit here.
It is, and it isn't. It is like those remakes that it was a cash grab by the studios because it's cool now to revamp IP's from 80's movies/dead franchises, what makes it different from those remakes is that they were involved in a faux GremlinGlink debacle. That the movie was attacked on political lines, including the cast personally, merely for having the audacity to have an all-female GhostBusters reboot is something that shouldn't be ignored. It happened, whether you want to talk about it or not. Nobody is stopping you from not referencing that in your opinions of the movie, in fact I welcome it - but please, don't try to bury it from being in the conversation. It isn't the first movie to be a political firestorm and won't be the last.
BTW, I've wanted to post my opinion to this effect since the thread started but was intimidated from doing so by the "FUCK THE HATERS! This movie is doing SO well despite those sexists! Fuck anyone saying anything to the contrary!" sentiment earlier in this thread. It feels like only now, as political fervor cools, and box office results are coming in with cold, objective numbers to back up negative reviews that it's safe to openly critique the film.
I was clear, and so were others, that this was aimed at the GoblinGizzards who did things like harass Leslie Jones off twitter. If you are not in that group you are not being insulted by those arguments. On the contrary, this thread values your input. There are two groups who didn't like the film, and you're not in the bad one. The box office is not proof they were right, like Fan4stic bombing wasn't because Michael B. Jordan played Johnny Storm. If you think it was a terrible movie because of its quality, that's a rational critique for its fate.
And that's something else I think we need to step back from.
It was never there in the first place, which I've tried numerous times to explain and got nothing for my efforts.
You have nothing to fear by critiquing the movie on its own merits. Many people who liked the movie may even agree with it, the movie was not perfect.
It feels like only now, as political fervor cools, and box office results are coming in with cold, objective numbers to back up negative reviews that it's safe to openly critique the film.
Hmm. That is odd, because at no point in this post did you *actually* critique the film.
I loved it, but I can name a half-dozen flaws that would have bothered me a lot more if I hadn't found it funny. Comedy is subjective, and we are always going to be more forgiving if we like the jokes and less if we don't.
Heck, I think that applies doubly to the original. It was less coherent as a movie than the remake, just an excuse for some special effects and some riffing by Murray and Akroyd. Which I also forgave because I find them funny.
+6
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
So does Akroyd own the Ghostbusters IP?
I saw he was listed as an executive producer and several other times in the credits but none of the others were. Just curious.
This doesn't really say anything we already don't know, but the comment deletion thing as Sony manipulating social justice as advertising does seem plausible given that they were all too willing to delete the glass ceiling tweet
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
BTW, I've wanted to post my opinion to this effect since the thread started but was intimidated from doing so by the "FUCK THE HATERS! This movie is doing SO well despite those sexists! Fuck anyone saying anything to the contrary!" sentiment earlier in this thread. It feels like only now, as political fervor cools, and box office results are coming in with cold, objective numbers to back up negative reviews that it's safe to openly critique the film.
So you are saying, that since it didn't make a bajillion dollars, only the negative reviews count and Ghostbusters is a bad movie? Well then I suppose the ~$330m that Batman v Superman made means only the positive reviews count, and it really was a good movie after all.
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
Form matters slightly less when you're equipped like that.
+1
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
Form matters slightly less when you're equipped like that.
That's true. They were more like pneumatic brass knuckles.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
I would have rather them found some clever way to beat the ghost mob, rather than just devolving into typical action hero montage. Close up shot of everyone having a turn at being an "instant badass." To each their own, but I will pass.
"It's chippin' time now, ghost!" I mean really? Is that a memorable and iconic line?
The thing that bothered me about the extra guns: If you have the ability to build them, why bother with the proton packs at all? Why not build a few ghost-killing AR-15s and solve the whole problem that way? Overall I liked the movie but it went downhill when they brought out the overly obvious toy inspiration guns and video game combat scenes.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
I would have rather them found some clever way to beat the ghost mob, rather than just devolving into typical action hero montage. Close up shot of everyone having a turn at being an "instant badass." To each their own, but I will pass.
Oh, no shade at all. My co-worker didn't like the scene for largely the same reason.
EDIT:
Not every one-liner has to be iconic tho.
MalReynolds on
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Posts
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Which is what movies are for
...well, that's what I heard
Ehhh. I'm not going to discredit your opinion. But for me the movie wasn't very fun. I keep saying it again and again that I feel like everyone who enjoyed the movie saw a different movie than I did.
And despite a thirty plus year record of mega fandom for the franchise this movie actually killed my buzz. If the franchise is going to lose its soul and just be like every other modern comedy I think I may just be done with the franchise in general. I mean I will still watch the old ones all the time and watch my RGB DVDs with my kids. But as far as wearing my logo wear and my flight suit etc. I think I am done for a while.
And I can't understate how that really shakes me to my core.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Nothing about Holtzman made sense.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Yeah, that's quite possibly much more of a subjective issue than a problem with the move
I have a hard time articulating this to people, but the original film is more than just my all-time favorite movie.
Ghostbusters hit theaters almost exactly a year after I was born. It was fresh on cable when I was forming my first freakishly early memories. I would insist on trying to watch it, then be scared into nightmares regularly and often for the first six years of my life. And the same with sequel. I had action figures and toys and a proton pack (with the foam neutron stream). I could quote the entire movie by the age of eight, and had always gotten most of the jokes.
My best friend and I, both in our early- and mid-30's now, can essentially live out entire work days by dealing with them through GB quotes. He's kind of pissed by the new movie.
I just saw A Different Ghostbusters. Not lesser, but different.
But that's been a lot of my nerdsperience; I literally learned to read through Marvel comics. The first song lyrics I memorized were the Spider-Man theme. I wore a Spidey action figure on my highschool graduation mortar board. In 1999, Marvel actually authorized my band to use the band name The Righteous Spider-Men, in writing. I've still got the email from their legal department.
But these things live on
Peter Parker becomes Miles Morales; Spengler becomes Holtzman; Bruce Banner becomes David Banner becomes Bruce again.
Someday, John McClaine becomes Jenna; Axle Foley becomes Alejandro; Luke becomes Rey and Han becomes Finn
Our childhood can never be destroyed by somebody else's- only made greater by bringing joy to a new generation. If GB16 doesn't hold up on rematch, I can throw my pour a glass of scotch and throw in my copy of the original. And we all remember the lyrics to our favorite theme songs.
If you're worried you'll forget about your favorite things, here's a test: MagicPrime! What is best in life!?
Which isn't the worst thing in the world, because he is hilarious, but it didn't become any more special to me than Stripes.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Then you know
These things that you love will always be unspoiled
You know
The riddle
Of steel
A lot of people say they miss the dry humor of the original, but a lot of that might be due to how much the city has changed. I'm sure that the cast of "Hot Fuzz" could probably knock a reboot of Ghostbusters out of the park, but then it wouldn't be New York anymore.
Another big shift in the reboot is that the original movie tries to make ghostbusting a blue collar activity with blue collar goals: Exterminate ghosts for $$$. The reboot turns ghostbusting into an academic activity with academic goals: Find proof that ghosts exists. Which is probably a lot more realistic. In the original movie, they go straight from seeing one single ghost in the library to deciding to go into business around Ghostbusting, where they develop all their equipment and build a containment system before they even have any idea what the market is. It only works because Bill Murray is basically a charlatan rather than a true believer, who treats his job as more of a con than a legitimate service.
The librarian ghost from the original is also just a gaping plothole in general. Like, here's definitive proof that ghosts are real, and all you have to do is visit the library to check it out. Why isn't that bigger news? Also, why don't they bother testing their equipment on the librarian?
Not much from the original was based on 1980's New York. There's the mayor and there's the throwaway line that the firehouse is in a DMZ, while these days even East New York is getting gentrified, but the rest of the film is around the UWS or the Plaza hotel on 5th. Areas that have become safer since the 80s, but haven't really changed their character, not like Williamsburg or TriBeCa or the like. Ghostbusters 2 was more NYC culture-centric, but the less said about that movie, the better.
Changes are probably more due to different comedic leads, having four main characters instead of three, and more general trends in comedy writing. Three beat comedy skits don't lend themselves to either subtlety or letting jokes breathe.
Even if you don't like how the optics for Patty, at least the one minority lead made it to the fucking poster
In the end, I'd say that's positive change enough.
I mean it didn't diminish my enjoyment of the movie, but world-building is fun. Especially since they clearly want to expand this into a franchise; this should have been the ground-rules movie.
For me them just throwing the ghosts around was very lazy. On a shallow level maybe people thought it was a good action scene. But I couldn't help but think that they should have done something more clever than just devolve into a CGI acid trip.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
This line of posts seems funny to me because they actually did try a Conan remake in 2011 and it was a flop.
It seems pretty clear to me that there have been many, many terrible remakes of cult 80s films hoping to rake in that nostalgia money. And just like Conan (2011), Total Recall (2012), and Robocop (2014); Ghostbusters (2016) is bad movie that will have a weak response and be ultimately forgotten.
Many people who have invested a lot in the politics of an all woman cast are trying to interpret this in a different way, and I'm sorry, but I don't think your view is based on objective fact. I don't mean this as an insult, it's easy to become blinded by issues important to us, but we need to step back a bit here.
BTW, I've wanted to post my opinion to this effect since the thread started but was intimidated from doing so by the "FUCK THE HATERS! This movie is doing SO well despite those sexists! Fuck anyone saying anything to the contrary!" sentiment earlier in this thread. It feels like only now, as political fervor cools, and box office results are coming in with cold, objective numbers to back up negative reviews that it's safe to openly critique the film.
And that's something else I think we need to step back from.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Agreed.
It is, and it isn't. It is like those remakes that it was a cash grab by the studios because it's cool now to revamp IP's from 80's movies/dead franchises, what makes it different from those remakes is that they were involved in a faux GremlinGlink debacle. That the movie was attacked on political lines, including the cast personally, merely for having the audacity to have an all-female GhostBusters reboot is something that shouldn't be ignored. It happened, whether you want to talk about it or not. Nobody is stopping you from not referencing that in your opinions of the movie, in fact I welcome it - but please, don't try to bury it from being in the conversation. It isn't the first movie to be a political firestorm and won't be the last.
I was clear, and so were others, that this was aimed at the GoblinGizzards who did things like harass Leslie Jones off twitter. If you are not in that group you are not being insulted by those arguments. On the contrary, this thread values your input. There are two groups who didn't like the film, and you're not in the bad one. The box office is not proof they were right, like Fan4stic bombing wasn't because Michael B. Jordan played Johnny Storm. If you think it was a terrible movie because of its quality, that's a rational critique for its fate.
It was never there in the first place, which I've tried numerous times to explain and got nothing for my efforts.
You have nothing to fear by critiquing the movie on its own merits. Many people who liked the movie may even agree with it, the movie was not perfect.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Hmm. That is odd, because at no point in this post did you *actually* critique the film.
Heck, I think that applies doubly to the original. It was less coherent as a movie than the remake, just an excuse for some special effects and some riffing by Murray and Akroyd. Which I also forgave because I find them funny.
I saw he was listed as an executive producer and several other times in the credits but none of the others were. Just curious.
It's all moved over to GhostCorps now. Of which Reitman and Aykroyd are board members.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
I love scientist man, no more hack, no more fraud, just scientist man forever.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
For better or worse they wanted an action sequence.
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
I thought the action sequence was pretty cool, except Melissa McCarthy didn't really seem to have good form while punch throwing.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
So you are saying, that since it didn't make a bajillion dollars, only the negative reviews count and Ghostbusters is a bad movie? Well then I suppose the ~$330m that Batman v Superman made means only the positive reviews count, and it really was a good movie after all.
Form matters slightly less when you're equipped like that.
That's true. They were more like pneumatic brass knuckles.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
That fits entirely with her character, though.
I would have rather them found some clever way to beat the ghost mob, rather than just devolving into typical action hero montage. Close up shot of everyone having a turn at being an "instant badass." To each their own, but I will pass.
"It's chippin' time now, ghost!" I mean really? Is that a memorable and iconic line?
Critical Failures - Havenhold Campaign • August St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
Oh, no shade at all. My co-worker didn't like the scene for largely the same reason.
EDIT:
Not every one-liner has to be iconic tho.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!