Ironically though, other movies have proven you don't need China like Deadpool. The foreign gross is amazingly terrible though - I honeslty am at a loss to explain why.
Seems well above average for American comedies with juvenile sexual jokes (e.g. The Hangover, American Pie, Knocked up, 40 year old virgin, etc.). Amazingly terrible sounds like a complete fabrication.
Uhhhh, the Foreign Gross of Ghostbusters is amazingly terrible. Deadpool was the one that proved you could do amazing without needing China, something that Ghostbusters has sadly not done.
I think you misread; Aegeri is arguing that you can do well internationally without China, just like Deadpool did, but that Ghostbusters' foreign numbers are not looking so good.
From my 8yo son: "That was awesome! Better than Star Wars!"
I'd say mission accomplished, movie.
My thoughts:
It was OK. The movie seemed too fast paced. Maybe I'm just getting older, but there wasn't enough time for me to feel the characters really gel, or something. That's kind of compliment to the actresses and writing becauses I wanted to just marinate in their characters and group and not plot-plot-plot.
Effects looked good. I think they did a good job with Slimer. He looked appropriately disgusting.
Hemsworth was hilarious.
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
The gadgets were fantastic. I didn't dig the ecto gauntlet before, but I came around. Gimme the vidjagame now
Not a whole lot more I want to say.
I think the most telling thing about this movie is that I started to write this on Monday, got sidetracked, and forgot about it until I came back to this thread. Like Godzilla, I may not be able to objectively rate or enjoy this movie because the original is such an integral part of my pop culture person.
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
+2
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
There was absolutely a typical movie scene in there where Wiig experiences her moment of doubt and says "Screw this, I'm trying Columbia again", or something, and then sees the book drawings and puts it all together in the anagnorisis.
+1
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
Movie clocks at just under two hours, so it could have been not wanting to go over the magic 120 minute mark.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Well I'm outside the US, and came here to get an idea of whether I want to see it or not, but after reading the last few pages I thought I'd put in an idea as to why this isn't doing so hot in Australia, despite having Australian acting royalty in it (we are normally suckers for Aussies in movies).
The trailer was terrible, and the this thread told me they were part of saturday night live, so I looked it up on youtube (with a vpn). I didn't find any of the primary cast very funny at all, I figure the humour doesn't translate well outside of the US.
They played the trailer twice on tv that I saw, during prime time TV.
I also saw in the local paper a review for "mums and bubs" - they review movies for mums/dads to take kids to, and they recommended against for off jokes, some scary moments etc, and strangely enough, poor male role models. There is a bit of a thing at the moment here where people are realising that dads and men are always displayed in media as being incompetent, and a bit of push back is occurring, so this might be from that.
So in Australia, there seems to be a "who is this for?" vibe. Everyone seems kind of meh about it, and even the girls at work who went as a group said it was ok, nothing special, maybe 1 or two laughs, wait for it to be on tv, felt like a waste of money and so on. Nothing glowing or great, neutral at most.
I wasn't overly aware on the whole sexism thing until they did a radio interview that I heard driving home from work, but then I'm trying to avoid negative things in my life as stuff was starting to get to me a bit. Seems sad that its devolved into what it has, but I guess that is what you get when you leave youtube comments on. I have since read more and both sides are in the wrong here, and everyone should be allowed to enjoy/dislike whatever the hell they want without having to justify it.
If anyone takes offence I apologise, its not my intent, nor am I trying to disparage anyone's enjoyment. I am trying to point out why I think it isn't doing so great here in my country.
Well I'm outside the US, and came here to get an idea of whether I want to see it or not, but after reading the last few pages I thought I'd put in an idea as to why this isn't doing so hot in Australia, despite having Australian acting royalty in it (we are normally suckers for Aussies in movies).
The trailer was terrible, and the this thread told me they were part of saturday night live, so I looked it up on youtube (with a vpn). I didn't find any of the primary cast very funny at all, I figure the humour doesn't translate well outside of the US.
They played the trailer twice on tv that I saw, during prime time TV.
McCarthy is a very popular comedian and actress in movies like Spy,Bridesmaids, and The Heat. Wiig was in Bridesmaids, too. How well did those movies do in Australia?
edit: Yeah, the advertising and promotions have been terrible for this movie. No argument there.
I also saw in the local paper a review for "mums and bubs" - they review movies for mums/dads to take kids to, and they recommended against for off jokes, some scary moments etc, and strangely enough, poor male role models.
Not anymore than usual in movies. This isn't Conjuring 2, if that's what you're wondering. Did you have this issue with Iron Man 3, or Winter Soldier? Movies I've been in theaters with where whole families took you go kids to without problems from them.
There is a bit of a thing at the moment here where people are realising that dads and men are always displayed in media as being incompetent, and a bit of push back is occurring, so this might be from that.
Cite. You can pick almost any movie or tv show and have a good male role model. That's why men being slightly less competent here isn't an issue for me. GB is literally one movie this happens it, unlike how women and girls are shown to be in media in aggregate. I don't have to go far to find examples, either. Here's one
None of the men in this movie are given a bad representation anywhere near Batgirl has. Even
Rowan
isn't a "nice guy" or obsessed over destroying women for rejecting him
he hates everyone equally, and in one scene the whole team try to understand and comfort him by identifying things they have in common with him. Like being disrespected by society.
The Mayor is pretty competent, as well.
The only scene where he fails at is when he tries to cover up the attack on NYC with a reporter, when it's obvious to everyone that ghosts are real. And the main people on his staff who try to ruin the GB's is a woman, played by Cecil Strong. Who is hilarious.
Kevin, their secretary, is of course a bumbling joke who is eye candy for the women - which is very uncommon role for male actors in productions in Hollywood. Erin tries to hit on him, and is scolded and made fun of for breaking the rules. It's a satire of what men in work places do in real life, and entertainment in general. Guess what happens to him? Rowan possesses him, and proceeds to kick all kinds of ass in the best sequence of the movie. The girl can't touch him in that form, and he outsmarts everyone, while having a ball doing it. Hemsworth looks like he's having a blast getting his villain on.
So in Australia, there seems to be a "who is this for?" vibe. Everyone seems kind of meh about it, and even the girls at work who went as a group said it was ok, nothing special, maybe 1 or two laughs, wait for it to be on tv, felt like a waste of money and so on. Nothing glowing or great, neutral at most.
Feminists, women, girls, and people who love seeing a group of scientists save the world from ghosts.
I wasn't overly aware on the whole sexism thing until they did a radio interview that I heard driving home from work, but then I'm trying to avoid negative things in my life as stuff was starting to get to me a bit. Seems sad that its devolved into what it has, but I guess that is what you get when you leave youtube comments on. I have since read more and both sides are in the wrong here, and everyone should be allowed to enjoy/dislike whatever the hell they want without having to justify it.
If anyone takes offence I apologise, its not my intent, nor am I trying to disparage anyone's enjoyment. I am trying to point out why I think it isn't doing so great here in my country.
Can you clarify this? Is this about the sexism angle from the people who despised the movie (no, I'm not saying everyone who didn't like it is in this category, merely the worst of the worst who wanted to do the second coming of GatorGhazi as soon as they heard this movie existed) or sexism in general? If it's the latter I honestly find it difficult to believe you are able to over look how entrenched sexism is in western culture. It's literally everywhere. Things have improved, but we have a long way to go as the controversial about a movie having an all-female GB cast can attest. In America we're finally getting a female politician in the presidential primary, we're behind Pakistan who did this in the 80's. In Australia it's first female PM had to launch a coup in her own ruling party to do it in 2010, it's never elected a female PM before to my knowledge. Which is disgrace, frankly.
Why do you think people who defend the movie are in the wrong?
Everyone should be able to enjoy and dislike what they want, to bad that isn't how media functions. People discuss things they didn't like, or have debates about things they find important. It's a valuable method for learning how people think, and analyze your own opinions in the process. This becomes extremely important when people go overboard with their opinions, on either side. Did you know Leslie Jones literally got chased off twitter by racist trolls over this? That many reports about the movie where filled with posts who hated the movie because it had women in it, and this occurred after the movie was announced. No cast, no director, Nothing. It escalated when the production ramped up, and we got trailers. GB '16 isn't the first media to get this, and it won't be last.
In a post-GozerGargamel world this was a sadly predictable pattern of what was going to happen to the production, not that things like that didn't occur in the past it's that after that things got significantly worse when those sexist and racist trolls felt they got actual power. Fan4stic and the Star Wars films went through something like this, too. To this day you'll find people on the internet who think they got vindicated that the movie bombed because it had a black Human Torch in it.
While I understand trying to avoid negative aspects in society is a useful tool, I can't say trying to ignore what's going on the world regarding how people react to each other over racism or sexism is a good idea. You may not want to engage, and you're are to do so, but acting like nothing bad is going on is sticking your head in the sand. I'd be shocked if your female friends haven't been exposed to issues with sexism in their lives. That kind of shit people can't turn off - having a media that is encouraging and welcoming to women is part of trying to help with this. It won't fix it, of course - but it doesn't have to to do good in this world.
Jesus, Harry, why do you always have to do this? The guy was just trying to explain the vibe in his country, as he saw. There was nothing offensive in his post. Then you have to go on and write a 3 page dissertation attacking the guy, demanding cites, and generally aggressively threadshitting your way in driving people who may or or may not even disagree with you, out of the thread. Way to be civil.
Jesus, Harry, why do you always have to do this? The guy was just trying to explain the vibe in his country, as he saw. There was nothing offensive in his post. Then you have to go on and write a 3 page dissertation attacking the guy, demanding cites, and generally aggressively threadshitting your way in driving people who may or or may not even disagree with you, out of the thread. Way to be civil.
Fine, I went overboard - I'll cop to that. When people dismiss societal problems and say "both sides are the same" without offering any reason for it, I tend not to hold much sympathy for. That was in no way an unbiased post who should have been immune to criticism. The info they gave for their opinion seems to also be hedging on not being fully informed on the discourse around the movie so I provided my own to balance it out, they can disagree with what I said all they want.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Jesus, Harry, why do you always have to do this? The guy was just trying to explain the vibe in his country, as he saw. There was nothing offensive in his post. Then you have to go on and write a 3 page dissertation attacking the guy, demanding cites, and generally aggressively threadshitting your way in driving people who may or or may not even disagree with you, out of the thread. Way to be civil.
Fine, I went overboard - I'll cop to that. When people dismiss societal problems and say "both sides are the same" without offering any reason for it, I tend not to hold much sympathy for. That was in no way an unbiased post who should have been immune to criticism. The info they gave for their opinion seems to also be hedging on not being fully informed on the discourse around the movie so I provided my own to balance it out, they can disagree with what I said all they want.
It isnt necessary to white knight every negative or lukewarm thing written about this film.
And that post is a perfect example of why people may or may not post negative impressions here. Jesus dude.
Jesus, Harry, why do you always have to do this? The guy was just trying to explain the vibe in his country, as he saw. There was nothing offensive in his post. Then you have to go on and write a 3 page dissertation attacking the guy, demanding cites, and generally aggressively threadshitting your way in driving people who may or or may not even disagree with you, out of the thread. Way to be civil.
Fine, I went overboard - I'll cop to that. When people dismiss societal problems and say "both sides are the same" without offering any reason for it, I tend not to hold much sympathy for. That was in no way an unbiased post who should have been immune to criticism. The info they gave for their opinion seems to also be hedging on not being fully informed on the discourse around the movie so I provided my own to balance it out, they can disagree with what I said all they want.
The topic is "why isn't this movie doing so well overseas?" If you stick to the thesis, your posts will be more relevant and engaging. A problem all of us have is setting up general talking points that pad our posts with information related to the general subject and not the specific argument, because we're all brimming with diatribes we just want an excuse to use, even if they don't exactly fit. That's when we get to talking past each other.
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.
+2
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
I'm also from Australia, but I do see where he's coming from. There hasn't been very much - if at all - about the movie here in terms of advertising and so forth. Plus I think the severe negative reaction online has colored the general impressions of the movie for many here, so it's been generally avoided.
Jesus, Harry, why do you always have to do this? The guy was just trying to explain the vibe in his country, as he saw. There was nothing offensive in his post. Then you have to go on and write a 3 page dissertation attacking the guy, demanding cites, and generally aggressively threadshitting your way in driving people who may or or may not even disagree with you, out of the thread. Way to be civil.
Fine, I went overboard - I'll cop to that. When people dismiss societal problems and say "both sides are the same" without offering any reason for it, I tend not to hold much sympathy for. That was in no way an unbiased post who should have been immune to criticism. The info they gave for their opinion seems to also be hedging on not being fully informed on the discourse around the movie so I provided my own to balance it out, they can disagree with what I said all they want.
The topic is "why isn't this movie doing so well overseas?" If you stick to the thesis, your posts will be more relevant and engaging. A problem all of us have is setting up general talking points that pad our posts with information related to the general subject and not the specific argument, because we're all brimming with diatribes we just want an excuse to use, even if they don't exactly fit. That's when we get to talking past each other.
I would say from the UK perspective:
Any marketing for the film outside of interviews has been either non existent or poorly received and extremely late. A lot of movie goers I talked to today didn't even realise the movie was out. Given that the film released at what I would say was the perfect summer release slot its quite worrying how little impact it made.
I would also argue that when any TV or radio interviews for the press have been about its been entirely focused on the sexism and not the film will have had an impact on how well it was promoted.
Sony pretty much fucked up its marketing for this film.
I could see that coming when I saw the first screenshot and it looked just like the Sanctum of Slime.
It's kind of too bad that no even ever took the concepts from the 2009 game and refined them into a better game. The 2009 game is not great, but's it's way better then anything since (and probably before).
Whilst I am a little surprised at seeing such a big response to why I think its not doing well, I will actually answer Harry Dresden's questions as best I can within the topic at hand. I am sorry if I go a little off topic as I need to discuss Australia and its values a little. I hope some other Aussies can clarify better, I'm an immigrant (from a young age) so not necessarily 100% on everything, and some cultural differences exist between states.
I did look up the movies you mentioned, and I saw Spy at the cinema with my wife. I didn't mind it at all, but found McCarthy to be the one of the weaker actors, (Jason Stratham's lines were hillarious, and Ill never forget the one about being disguised as Obama giving an address to congress). This is not necessarily a bad thing - for me Jerry Seinfeld was the worst actor in Seinfeld. Bridesmaids did $28 million (2011), Spy (2015) did $10 million, The Heat did $13 million (2013), Ghostbusters (2016) is currently at $6 million (note, all $AUS so roughly halve it for $US). McCarthy may very well be well known in the US, but here in Australia we do not have saturday night live, or anything like it, so to us she is only really a comedic actor, and as I said I watched some of her stuff and didn't enjoy it, so for me, she isn't a draw. I asked my wife, and all she remembers is Gilmore Girls, Spy, Bridesmaids.
I mentioned the "mums and bubs" review as it was one of the few reviews I have seen that targets this particular audience, which is a large market here. So does "chicks at the flicks" as for the same price as a normal ticket you get a social outing, gift bags, chats with others in similar family/life situations, catchups etc. The tv advertisements and morning tv interviews here made the film look attractive to this market, with no scary bits at all, and cartoon looking (like in the scooby do movies) ghosts with family friendly humour. This review stood in contrast to that style of advertising. Perhaps the movie was marketed differently in the US? None of those other movies you listed were aimed at the parents and kids market in Australia, all clearly marketed at the older market. As an aside, it is my wife wanting to see those movies, because she loves the marvel movies a lot.
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
The sexism was specifically about the movie. Apparently if you don't like it, or don't think it should have been made, you are a misogynist according to the director and cast. Australians on the whole try to be about giving everyone a fair go. This is starting to disappear a bit which is a shame, because I believe everyone deserves one. I don't believe in special treatment. I see some of the third wave feminist stuff coming out of the US and don't understand it, and strongly disagree that I am racist/sexist from birth, and I will not apologise for things done by my ancestors as I had no say in any of it, nor should I pay reparations. I don't expect reparations for 90% of the people with my last name and heritage being exterminated by the Nazis, and do not blame modern Germany or Germans.
In Australia, we had a female prime minister, who gained the top job by knifing the sitting prime minister who was popular with the populace but not with other politicians. This was widely regarded as a bad move, and though imo she was a good prime minister in a number of ways, she suffered some ghastly attacks from the opposition. Unfortunately our press is controlled pretty much by Murdoch and he engineered her downfall. She really needed another term, as some of her plans were good. I would have voted for her party again. Unfortunately they did such a hatchet job that there won't be another female prime minister for a while, but I believe if the right person came along and led the party without knifing someone, they would get a fair go.
I don't think I ever pointed out that people defending the movie were wrong? I said I want no part in the debate about sexism, because whilst I can't declare that it pays no part in the movies poor performance in Australia, I doubt very much that it plays a huge part. I saw the question asked why it wasn't doing so great and thought I'd throw in my ideas.
Look I don't want to fight, especially not on the internet, its never productive. Australia and the US have some very different cultural elements and this movie and its style of humour may fall directly into that chasm.
After my best mate saw it with her gf, she said not to bother, and that is one opinion I can't ignore.
If you want to talk more Harry Dresden, more than welcome to PM me, I like learning how and why other people think the way they do.
+1
Options
AJRSome guy who wrestlesNorwichRegistered Userregular
I don't think Ghostbusters is doing all that bad here in Australia to be honest. It was #1 the first week, #2 the second. It made more on it's opening weekend than Star Trek: Beyond did. No idea how long it will stay in cinemas, but I don't think it's done that bad.
I don't think Ghostbusters is doing all that bad here in Australia to be honest. It was #1 the first week, #2 the second. It made more on it's opening weekend than Star Trek: Beyond did. No idea how long it will stay in cinemas, but I don't think it's done that bad.
Well how it does in the dream time is really the bigger factor for Australia Box office
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
He didn't say they cut a scene, he suggested that a scene like that should have been in there so they probably cut one.
Ironically though, other movies have proven you don't need China like Deadpool. The foreign gross is amazingly terrible though - I honeslty am at a loss to explain why.
In the case of Ghostbusters, are we seeing a repeat of The Force Awakens--which simply didn't explode in the foreign box office overall like it did in the United States ($936 million - 45.3% versus $1,131 million - 54.7%)?
In the case of TFA, it was simply a matter that a lot of the drive to see it domestically wasn't the movie itself, but because Star Wars was a cultural institution, a beloved pillar of American culture. Everyone knew what Star Wars was. But in other countries--China and India--Star Wars is sort of a novelty of the 1990s, with some interest, but not something necessarily seen as a cultural phenomenon.
I wonder if Ghostbusters occupies a similar position--if you're somewhere that the original 1984 film isn't a beloved gem of comedic cinema, this seems like another Hollywood reboot of a old film you're only vaguely familiar with.
Or it could be something totally different. The Force Awakens was literally the most advertised film in human history, extending into other countries. Obviously Ghostbusters isn't going to have that same level of promotion, but I wonder if not knowing what Ghostbusters is historically, or not caring, is going to effect it.
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Well, we do have an entire channel dedicated to the idea that men are inherently evil.
+1
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Well, we do have an entire channel dedicated to the idea that men are inherently evil.
What channel might that be.
"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 whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
He didn't say they cut a scene, he suggested that a scene like that should have been in there so they probably cut one.
Yep. My suspicion is that as originally written/filmed, after the fake arrest, Eryn probably bailed on the team. She agreed to shut up about ghosts to get her tenure at Colombia. And then she realized it wasn't over while reading the book, and then probably called the team and spoke to possessed Abby who told her to buzz off.
Otherwise:
Why did Eyrn rescuing the team get shot so much like a "OK we're friends again" scene?
Why didn't the team mention or try getting a hold of Eryn while rolling out - not even a "she's not answering the phone"?
Why didn't Eryn try to contact the team to tell them what was up?
Shadowhope on
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Ch...Channing Tatum?
That trope especially in advertising has been around for at least 35 years plus, if not longer. Whats sad though is that in a lot of targeted advertising towards younger men with the old "buy this and sexy woman will instantly find you attractive" cliche has pretty much died down over the past few years for being outdated and sexist. However, this particular tired trope of the imcompetent male one is still considered acceptable.
I finally watched the film. I have laughed a lot more than I did in the original, and I enjoyed every minute of it. I may also be in love with Holtzmann. 10/10 would watch again.
And thank you to everyone in the thread for encouraging me to go see it!
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Ch...Channing Tatum?
That trope especially in advertising has been around for at least 35 years plus, if not longer. Whats sad though is that in a lot of targeted advertising towards younger men with the old "buy this and sexy woman will instantly find you attractive" cliche has pretty much died down over the past few years for being outdated and sexist. However, this particular tired trope of the imcompetent male one is still considered acceptable.
I'm still lost on what Channing Tatum has to do with all of this
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Well, we do have an entire channel dedicated to the idea that men are inherently evil.
What channel might that be.
Lifetime.
I've seen enough while trying to eek my way into a cuddle sesh to know all cops are ignorant and will not help anyone, all husbands are inherently cheaters and or murderers, and sons are the only kids who do horrible shit.
What current sitcoms play the dopey male husband trope? I'm not super up on them, but I'm having trouble coming up with any.
The Simpsons?
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.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Simpsons is like 30 years old. Family Guy is a riff on the trope, not the trope itself.
Who is the dopey husband on Modern Family Phil, I guess? He is far more goofy than dopey, and he is balanced out by Jay (clearly at least as competent as his wife).
Mike Heck on the middle is by far the more competent of the two. Any plot on that show involving the parents is probably "mom has crazy idea because of her emotions, dad says to leave it alone, she does it anyway and it blows up in her face."
Haven't seen the other two.
Inkstain82 on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Ch...Channing Tatum?
That trope especially in advertising has been around for at least 35 years plus, if not longer. Whats sad though is that in a lot of targeted advertising towards younger men with the old "buy this and sexy woman will instantly find you attractive" cliche has pretty much died down over the past few years for being outdated and sexist. However, this particular tired trope of the imcompetent male one is still considered acceptable.
I'm still lost on what Channing Tatum has to do with all of this
Posts
Uhhhh, the Foreign Gross of Ghostbusters is amazingly terrible. Deadpool was the one that proved you could do amazing without needing China, something that Ghostbusters has sadly not done.
I think you misread; Aegeri is arguing that you can do well internationally without China, just like Deadpool did, but that Ghostbusters' foreign numbers are not looking so good.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
I'd say mission accomplished, movie.
My thoughts:
It was OK. The movie seemed too fast paced. Maybe I'm just getting older, but there wasn't enough time for me to feel the characters really gel, or something. That's kind of compliment to the actresses and writing becauses I wanted to just marinate in their characters and group and not plot-plot-plot.
Effects looked good. I think they did a good job with Slimer. He looked appropriately disgusting.
Hemsworth was hilarious.
The whole scene with the first ghost they actually captured was really good, from start to finish.
The gadgets were fantastic. I didn't dig the ecto gauntlet before, but I came around. Gimme the vidjagame now
Not a whole lot more I want to say.
I think the most telling thing about this movie is that I started to write this on Monday, got sidetracked, and forgot about it until I came back to this thread. Like Godzilla, I may not be able to objectively rate or enjoy this movie because the original is such an integral part of my pop culture person.
Actually one thing that bothered me was the scene when Wiig released it for Bill Murray's character. I still don't understand why, besides <plot device>. That conflict seemed super artificial.
Pages back, somebody suggested they cut a scene at the end of Act 2 where Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy's characters get into a big fight and Kristen quits the team. That makes the most sense narratively and explains why Kristen was away from the rest of the Ghostbusters until the end of Act 3. If so, that would have been one of the scenes building up to that fight. I have no idea why they would have cut it; maybe they couldn't make it funny or work in the story, or just budget reasons.
There was absolutely a typical movie scene in there where Wiig experiences her moment of doubt and says "Screw this, I'm trying Columbia again", or something, and then sees the book drawings and puts it all together in the anagnorisis.
Movie clocks at just under two hours, so it could have been not wanting to go over the magic 120 minute mark.
The trailer was terrible, and the this thread told me they were part of saturday night live, so I looked it up on youtube (with a vpn). I didn't find any of the primary cast very funny at all, I figure the humour doesn't translate well outside of the US.
They played the trailer twice on tv that I saw, during prime time TV.
I also saw in the local paper a review for "mums and bubs" - they review movies for mums/dads to take kids to, and they recommended against for off jokes, some scary moments etc, and strangely enough, poor male role models. There is a bit of a thing at the moment here where people are realising that dads and men are always displayed in media as being incompetent, and a bit of push back is occurring, so this might be from that.
So in Australia, there seems to be a "who is this for?" vibe. Everyone seems kind of meh about it, and even the girls at work who went as a group said it was ok, nothing special, maybe 1 or two laughs, wait for it to be on tv, felt like a waste of money and so on. Nothing glowing or great, neutral at most.
I wasn't overly aware on the whole sexism thing until they did a radio interview that I heard driving home from work, but then I'm trying to avoid negative things in my life as stuff was starting to get to me a bit. Seems sad that its devolved into what it has, but I guess that is what you get when you leave youtube comments on. I have since read more and both sides are in the wrong here, and everyone should be allowed to enjoy/dislike whatever the hell they want without having to justify it.
If anyone takes offence I apologise, its not my intent, nor am I trying to disparage anyone's enjoyment. I am trying to point out why I think it isn't doing so great here in my country.
McCarthy is a very popular comedian and actress in movies like Spy, Bridesmaids, and The Heat. Wiig was in Bridesmaids, too. How well did those movies do in Australia?
edit: Yeah, the advertising and promotions have been terrible for this movie. No argument there.
Not anymore than usual in movies. This isn't Conjuring 2, if that's what you're wondering. Did you have this issue with Iron Man 3, or Winter Soldier? Movies I've been in theaters with where whole families took you go kids to without problems from them.
Cite. You can pick almost any movie or tv show and have a good male role model. That's why men being slightly less competent here isn't an issue for me. GB is literally one movie this happens it, unlike how women and girls are shown to be in media in aggregate. I don't have to go far to find examples, either. Here's one
None of the men in this movie are given a bad representation anywhere near Batgirl has. Even
Kevin, their secretary, is of course a bumbling joke who is eye candy for the women - which is very uncommon role for male actors in productions in Hollywood. Erin tries to hit on him, and is scolded and made fun of for breaking the rules. It's a satire of what men in work places do in real life, and entertainment in general. Guess what happens to him? Rowan possesses him, and proceeds to kick all kinds of ass in the best sequence of the movie. The girl can't touch him in that form, and he outsmarts everyone, while having a ball doing it. Hemsworth looks like he's having a blast getting his villain on.
Feminists, women, girls, and people who love seeing a group of scientists save the world from ghosts.
Can you clarify this? Is this about the sexism angle from the people who despised the movie (no, I'm not saying everyone who didn't like it is in this category, merely the worst of the worst who wanted to do the second coming of GatorGhazi as soon as they heard this movie existed) or sexism in general? If it's the latter I honestly find it difficult to believe you are able to over look how entrenched sexism is in western culture. It's literally everywhere. Things have improved, but we have a long way to go as the controversial about a movie having an all-female GB cast can attest. In America we're finally getting a female politician in the presidential primary, we're behind Pakistan who did this in the 80's. In Australia it's first female PM had to launch a coup in her own ruling party to do it in 2010, it's never elected a female PM before to my knowledge. Which is disgrace, frankly.
Why do you think people who defend the movie are in the wrong?
Everyone should be able to enjoy and dislike what they want, to bad that isn't how media functions. People discuss things they didn't like, or have debates about things they find important. It's a valuable method for learning how people think, and analyze your own opinions in the process. This becomes extremely important when people go overboard with their opinions, on either side. Did you know Leslie Jones literally got chased off twitter by racist trolls over this? That many reports about the movie where filled with posts who hated the movie because it had women in it, and this occurred after the movie was announced. No cast, no director, Nothing. It escalated when the production ramped up, and we got trailers. GB '16 isn't the first media to get this, and it won't be last.
In a post-GozerGargamel world this was a sadly predictable pattern of what was going to happen to the production, not that things like that didn't occur in the past it's that after that things got significantly worse when those sexist and racist trolls felt they got actual power. Fan4stic and the Star Wars films went through something like this, too. To this day you'll find people on the internet who think they got vindicated that the movie bombed because it had a black Human Torch in it.
While I understand trying to avoid negative aspects in society is a useful tool, I can't say trying to ignore what's going on the world regarding how people react to each other over racism or sexism is a good idea. You may not want to engage, and you're are to do so, but acting like nothing bad is going on is sticking your head in the sand. I'd be shocked if your female friends haven't been exposed to issues with sexism in their lives. That kind of shit people can't turn off - having a media that is encouraging and welcoming to women is part of trying to help with this. It won't fix it, of course - but it doesn't have to to do good in this world.
Fine, I went overboard - I'll cop to that. When people dismiss societal problems and say "both sides are the same" without offering any reason for it, I tend not to hold much sympathy for. That was in no way an unbiased post who should have been immune to criticism. The info they gave for their opinion seems to also be hedging on not being fully informed on the discourse around the movie so I provided my own to balance it out, they can disagree with what I said all they want.
It isnt necessary to white knight every negative or lukewarm thing written about this film.
And that post is a perfect example of why people may or may not post negative impressions here. Jesus dude.
Fair warning: you really, REALLY don't want it.
The topic is "why isn't this movie doing so well overseas?" If you stick to the thesis, your posts will be more relevant and engaging. A problem all of us have is setting up general talking points that pad our posts with information related to the general subject and not the specific argument, because we're all brimming with diatribes we just want an excuse to use, even if they don't exactly fit. That's when we get to talking past each other.
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.
I would say from the UK perspective:
Any marketing for the film outside of interviews has been either non existent or poorly received and extremely late. A lot of movie goers I talked to today didn't even realise the movie was out. Given that the film released at what I would say was the perfect summer release slot its quite worrying how little impact it made.
I would also argue that when any TV or radio interviews for the press have been about its been entirely focused on the sexism and not the film will have had an impact on how well it was promoted.
Sony pretty much fucked up its marketing for this film.
I could see that coming when I saw the first screenshot and it looked just like the Sanctum of Slime.
It's kind of too bad that no even ever took the concepts from the 2009 game and refined them into a better game. The 2009 game is not great, but's it's way better then anything since (and probably before).
I did look up the movies you mentioned, and I saw Spy at the cinema with my wife. I didn't mind it at all, but found McCarthy to be the one of the weaker actors, (Jason Stratham's lines were hillarious, and Ill never forget the one about being disguised as Obama giving an address to congress). This is not necessarily a bad thing - for me Jerry Seinfeld was the worst actor in Seinfeld. Bridesmaids did $28 million (2011), Spy (2015) did $10 million, The Heat did $13 million (2013), Ghostbusters (2016) is currently at $6 million (note, all $AUS so roughly halve it for $US). McCarthy may very well be well known in the US, but here in Australia we do not have saturday night live, or anything like it, so to us she is only really a comedic actor, and as I said I watched some of her stuff and didn't enjoy it, so for me, she isn't a draw. I asked my wife, and all she remembers is Gilmore Girls, Spy, Bridesmaids.
I mentioned the "mums and bubs" review as it was one of the few reviews I have seen that targets this particular audience, which is a large market here. So does "chicks at the flicks" as for the same price as a normal ticket you get a social outing, gift bags, chats with others in similar family/life situations, catchups etc. The tv advertisements and morning tv interviews here made the film look attractive to this market, with no scary bits at all, and cartoon looking (like in the scooby do movies) ghosts with family friendly humour. This review stood in contrast to that style of advertising. Perhaps the movie was marketed differently in the US? None of those other movies you listed were aimed at the parents and kids market in Australia, all clearly marketed at the older market. As an aside, it is my wife wanting to see those movies, because she loves the marvel movies a lot.
With regards to the male incompetency, I believe its more common here than there. Dads are often portrayed as incompetent at parenting in many of our local shows and advertising especially, so this is probably a localised thing. It is something that this particular "mums and bubs" reviewer cares about, because they mention both when they are lacking in movies they review. You may not think its an issue, but some people care about positive, balanced male and female influences. If you want to read more about it, here is an article http://www.mamamia.com.au/stupid-male-characters/ Dismissing male issues because females have it worse just creates men who are constantly told they have it better while observing a world that benefits females due to equality initiatives - leading to men who are angry at women. I deal with a lot of young guys in this boat, and the patterns are always the same.
The sexism was specifically about the movie. Apparently if you don't like it, or don't think it should have been made, you are a misogynist according to the director and cast. Australians on the whole try to be about giving everyone a fair go. This is starting to disappear a bit which is a shame, because I believe everyone deserves one. I don't believe in special treatment. I see some of the third wave feminist stuff coming out of the US and don't understand it, and strongly disagree that I am racist/sexist from birth, and I will not apologise for things done by my ancestors as I had no say in any of it, nor should I pay reparations. I don't expect reparations for 90% of the people with my last name and heritage being exterminated by the Nazis, and do not blame modern Germany or Germans.
In Australia, we had a female prime minister, who gained the top job by knifing the sitting prime minister who was popular with the populace but not with other politicians. This was widely regarded as a bad move, and though imo she was a good prime minister in a number of ways, she suffered some ghastly attacks from the opposition. Unfortunately our press is controlled pretty much by Murdoch and he engineered her downfall. She really needed another term, as some of her plans were good. I would have voted for her party again. Unfortunately they did such a hatchet job that there won't be another female prime minister for a while, but I believe if the right person came along and led the party without knifing someone, they would get a fair go.
I don't think I ever pointed out that people defending the movie were wrong? I said I want no part in the debate about sexism, because whilst I can't declare that it pays no part in the movies poor performance in Australia, I doubt very much that it plays a huge part. I saw the question asked why it wasn't doing so great and thought I'd throw in my ideas.
Look I don't want to fight, especially not on the internet, its never productive. Australia and the US have some very different cultural elements and this movie and its style of humour may fall directly into that chasm.
After my best mate saw it with her gf, she said not to bother, and that is one opinion I can't ignore.
If you want to talk more Harry Dresden, more than welcome to PM me, I like learning how and why other people think the way they do.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Well how it does in the dream time is really the bigger factor for Australia Box office
He didn't say they cut a scene, he suggested that a scene like that should have been in there so they probably cut one.
In the case of Ghostbusters, are we seeing a repeat of The Force Awakens--which simply didn't explode in the foreign box office overall like it did in the United States ($936 million - 45.3% versus $1,131 million - 54.7%)?
In the case of TFA, it was simply a matter that a lot of the drive to see it domestically wasn't the movie itself, but because Star Wars was a cultural institution, a beloved pillar of American culture. Everyone knew what Star Wars was. But in other countries--China and India--Star Wars is sort of a novelty of the 1990s, with some interest, but not something necessarily seen as a cultural phenomenon.
I wonder if Ghostbusters occupies a similar position--if you're somewhere that the original 1984 film isn't a beloved gem of comedic cinema, this seems like another Hollywood reboot of a old film you're only vaguely familiar with.
Or it could be something totally different. The Force Awakens was literally the most advertised film in human history, extending into other countries. Obviously Ghostbusters isn't going to have that same level of promotion, but I wonder if not knowing what Ghostbusters is historically, or not caring, is going to effect it.
This is a tangent but this bothers the shit out of me. Every commercial you see, especially if it is selling anything even remotely "domestic" (soaps, cleaners, etc) has some idiot guy doing something wrong and his wife correcting him. Men in commercials are too stupid to change diapers, clean counters, load dishwashers, drive cars, you name it. The typical "family oriented" sitcom is a dumb, usually fat husband with an attractive, pushy wife who nags him 24/7 because he just can't stop screwing up.
I still haven't seen Ghostbusters but from what I have seen of Channing Tatum's character his stupidity doesn't really bother me, he's just the gender swapped version of the stereotypical "dumb/ditzy blonde bimbo" female, but the whole "incompetent men" archetype is everywhere. It's this massive silent sexism that will surprise you with how often you see it once you start keeping an eye out.
Well, we do have an entire channel dedicated to the idea that men are inherently evil.
What channel might that be.
"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!
Yep. My suspicion is that as originally written/filmed, after the fake arrest, Eryn probably bailed on the team. She agreed to shut up about ghosts to get her tenure at Colombia. And then she realized it wasn't over while reading the book, and then probably called the team and spoke to possessed Abby who told her to buzz off.
Otherwise:
Ch...Channing Tatum?
That trope especially in advertising has been around for at least 35 years plus, if not longer. Whats sad though is that in a lot of targeted advertising towards younger men with the old "buy this and sexy woman will instantly find you attractive" cliche has pretty much died down over the past few years for being outdated and sexist. However, this particular tired trope of the imcompetent male one is still considered acceptable.
And thank you to everyone in the thread for encouraging me to go see it!
I'm still lost on what Channing Tatum has to do with all of this
What, they all look the same to you????!
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Lifetime.
I've seen enough while trying to eek my way into a cuddle sesh to know all cops are ignorant and will not help anyone, all husbands are inherently cheaters and or murderers, and sons are the only kids who do horrible shit.
It's baffling.
The Simpsons?
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.
Simpsons, Modern Family, Family Guy, The Middle, Black-ish, Mike and Molly...
Who is the dopey husband on Modern Family Phil, I guess? He is far more goofy than dopey, and he is balanced out by Jay (clearly at least as competent as his wife).
Mike Heck on the middle is by far the more competent of the two. Any plot on that show involving the parents is probably "mom has crazy idea because of her emotions, dad says to leave it alone, she does it anyway and it blows up in her face."
Haven't seen the other two.
Hes got everything to do with everything.
Them abs.