Recommended Posts

It's already started. If you don't like the trailer you're sexist.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/03/04/people-are-hating-the-ghostbusters-trailer-guess-why/

 

Everyone who dislikes it should now be ashamed of themselves because it's not possible it just looks bad. Nope, you're all sexist pigs.

37 minutes ago, Tyranade said:

Not going to lie but I found that trailer highly entertaining actually XD. Maybe it appeals to my very silly sense of humor XD!

May I recommend you watch this old 80's movie called Ghostbusters, it's exactly like this, even the same story, only with better humor, better actors and even better effects. 

  • Like 5
7 minutes ago, HawkMan said:

May I recommend you watch this old 80's movie called Ghostbusters, it's exactly like this, even the same story, only with better humor, better actors and even better effects. 

I've seen it. More times than I can count. I just have a thing for goofy looking movies because I find them oddly funny so yeah. I'm looking forward to this movie.

1 hour ago, trag3dy said:

It's already started. If you don't like the trailer you're sexist.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2016/03/04/people-are-hating-the-ghostbusters-trailer-guess-why/

 

Everyone who dislikes it should now be ashamed of themselves because it's not possible it just looks bad. Nope, you're all sexist pigs.

haha...not surprised.  It can't be that the trailer "lied" during the first 30 seconds (hinting that it was a sequel...but from what I'm understanding it is a hard reboot) ... or that the ending of the trailer with McCarthy getting slapped ... /sigh ... it was just a terrible trailer all around.  Doesn't matter who was playing the roles ... it was just bad.  

 

Anyway, not surprised someone would write a piece blaming sexism for the dislikes.  Of course, I'm sure there are people that wouldn't like it just because of the female leads ... but in this case the movie (based on the trailer) just looks terrible.

 

I really think they missed a chance if they don't tie it into the original Ghostbusters.  It could have simply been one of the girls was the daughter of the original Ghostbusters and work build from there.  But no, let's do a hard reboot and make it terrible at the same time.

 

Kids and your teens will probably enjoy it...and the "Spy" style jokes.

5 hours ago, Tyranade said:

I've seen it. More times than I can count. I just have a thing for goofy looking movies because I find them oddly funny so yeah. I'm looking forward to this movie.

There is goofy comedy movies and then there is this. This is so forced it can't possibly have been written with the same people in mind who grew up and loved the original(s).

2 hours ago, trag3dy said:

This is so bad that it can't possibly have been written with the same people in mind who grew up and loved the original(s).

yeah, Angry Joe sums it as its a perfect blend of those who do not knew about  the originals (the cast) and Elite (scriptwriter / producer / etc) Hollywood fat ass who want make a quick buck out of the Ghostbuster IP/license that they just acquires.

Just as I thought, this movie looks like garbage. Actually, that's an insult to garbage. The trailer was unfunny, looks like horrible CG (the ghosts in the original two films look way better than this crap), the acting looks subpar and the story rubbish. I'll not only pass on this film in theaters, but it wouldn't even be worth the bandwidth to watch on Netflix.

On 3/3/2016 at 1:06 PM, HawkMan said:

The trailer gives me me very mixed feelings.

 

one one hand, the ghosts look great, BUT that's also the problem.  They look too good, in a very uncharacteristic statement from me, There's too much CGI and the CGI is too good. it doesn't look like ghostbusters. 

 

The old classic animatronic and film trick ghosts had a feel to them that made them seem "realistic" in their way. these just look like really awesome CGI. and not the nice gritty real ghosts of ghostbusters. 

 

on top of that. the trailer gives the whole story away, and the whole story is basically a line by line retelling of the original movie. down to the token black "guy" and "his" role. 

 

They simply replaced the characters with women and placed it 30 years in the future and apparently everyone forgot that ghosts even existed in those 30 years... smh.... why... 

 

I'll watch, it. but it's definitely not going to be a classic. 

 

 

Not really  line for line of the movie at all  if you listen and watch the trialer it is not  .  the plot of this movie based on the trialer is  someone  is  using a machine or something to amplify  paranormal activity   now course in the original yes we had  Dana barrets apartment Evo shandor       that was  a conductive antenna  for  the same thing but   that is about it. it will still be a good flick to me despite  what haters  think about the casting  but  as a Fan of the original films   i am just  excited to see something  Ghostbusters  

3 hours ago, Hurmoth said:

Just as I thought, this movie looks like garbage. Actually, that's an insult to garbage. The trailer was unfunny, looks like horrible CG (the ghosts in the original two films look way better than this crap), the acting looks subpar and the story rubbish. I'll not only pass on this film in theaters, but it wouldn't even be worth the bandwidth to watch on Netflix.

 

 

All the uman ghost in the film including the  first one in the trialer are All done by real actors with LED suits on so the CGI stuff is kept as minimum as  possible in this flick on that area of things  but you know if  they had all this back in the 80s they use the heck out of CGI in some scenes  of the original film  

1 hour ago, notuptome2004 said:

 

 

Not really  line for line of the movie at all  if you listen and watch the trialer it is not  .  the plot of this movie based on the trialer is  someone  is  using a machine or something to amplify  paranormal activity   now course in the original yes we had  Dana barrets apartment Evo shandor       that was  a conductive antenna  for  the same thing but   that is about it. it will still be a good flick to me despite  what haters  think about the casting  but  as a Fan of the original films   i am just  excited to see something  Ghostbusters  

Just because the main antagonist is a human with a machine, doesn't make the story any less identical to the original movie, 

1 hour ago, notuptome2004 said:

 

 

All the uman ghost in the film including the  first one in the trialer are All done by real actors with LED suits on so the CGI stuff is kept as minimum as  possible in this flick on that area of things  but you know if  they had all this back in the 80s they use the heck out of CGI in some scenes  of the original film  

Ghostbusters didn't have the budget for that, it was not a high budget movie by any stretch. and just because you can do super crystal clear CGI and layered effects doesn't mean you should and that the effects look better for it.

 

The traditional effects work on the ghosts in the original movie look way more believable as ghosts than this super sharp neon CGI crap. 

9 hours ago, HawkMan said:

Ghostbusters didn't have the budget for that, it was not a high budget movie by any stretch. and just because you can do super crystal clear CGI and layered effects doesn't mean you should and that the effects look better for it.

 

The traditional effects work on the ghosts in the original movie look way more believable as ghosts than this super sharp neon CGI crap. 

 

. for example The last starfighter   of the same year   had visual effects beyond  what  

well i am just saying if they had the use of CGI back then who knows they would have made the movie using  CGI back then and ther  budget for the film back then was $30million   and that was a huge for the time  the  Last starfighter that used alot of CGI at the time  cost only $15million    and star trek 3 search for spock at the time had a $16million budget  and  way fx work then ghostbusters  

 

 

Still looks bad and they continue to ###### on the originals even more. The whole bit with the logo..

 

Gotta love the feminist agenda being pushed, too. They couldn't make it any more blatant. The women are the heroes and the big strong man (who they are portraying as an idiot, too, looks like) is the helpless secretary.

  • Like 1
7 minutes ago, trag3dy said:

 

 

Still looks bad and they continue to ###### on the originals even more. The whole bit with the logo..

 

Gotta love the feminist agenda being pushed, too. They couldn't make it any more blatant. The women are the heroes and the big strong man (who they are portraying as an idiot, too, looks like) is the helpless secretary.

uh...even the "newer" stuff in this trailer is terrible.

  • Like 2

The problem is this film doesn't a bit of seriousness at all to it. The original film took itself seriously, even with the comedy. The ghosts in the original (except for Slimmer) were actually scary and came off realistic. The ghosts in this film are brightly colored and look cartoonish, simply not scary in the least bit.

 

The jokes in the trailer felt like the lowest common denominator type of comedy. And the worst part, they weren't even funny. I'd rather watch Sharknado because at least it is suppose to be bad on purpose. This film, it isn't Ghostbusters, but a straight to DVD rip off of the original film. The script was originally titled Supernaturalbusters, but Sony wanted something cheap and crappy to air on SyFy one day.

  • Like 6

For me, there's no issue with the fact it's an all-female cast, it's the butchering of the roles. The jokes are predictable and base. 

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Zoom Workplace 7.1.0.41345 by Razvan Serea Zoom Workplace for Windows is a reliable video conferencing tool that makes it easy to connect and collaborate. With features like messaging, file sharing, and app integrations, it’s designed to streamline teamwork. You’ll get high-quality audio and video, strong security with end-to-end encryption, and an intuitive interface—all of which help remote teams and businesses stay productive and connected. Zoom Workplace key features: High-Definition Video & Audio: Provides clear, reliable communication for virtual meetings. End-to-End Encryption: Ensures secure communication with strong data protection. Multi-Factor Authentication: Adds an extra layer of security for user accounts. Integration with Productivity Apps: Supports seamless integration with Microsoft Office, Google Workspace, and more. File Sharing: Easily share files during meetings for efficient collaboration. Real-Time Messaging: Enables team chat for ongoing communication. Collaborative Whiteboarding: Allows teams to brainstorm and collaborate visually. Webinar Support: Host large webinars with interactive features. Administrative Controls: Manage user permissions, meeting settings, and security features. Cloud Storage: Automatically stores meetings and files in the cloud for easy access. Cross-Platform Support: Available on Windows, macOS, and mobile devices. Meeting features: Virtual Backgrounds: Customize your background for meetings to maintain privacy or enhance professionalism. Touch Up My Appearance: Automatically smoothens skin tone for a more polished video appearance. Breakout Rooms: Divide meetings into smaller sessions for group discussions or workshops. Live Transcription: Automatically generate real-time captions during meetings for accessibility. Zoom Apps: Integrate third-party applications directly into Zoom for enhanced functionality. Meeting Reactions: Participants can use emojis for quick, non-verbal feedback during meetings. Polling: Conduct live polls during meetings to gather instant feedback from participants. Attention Tracking: Monitors participant attention during meetings to ensure engagement. Closed Captioning: Enable manual or automatic captions for a more inclusive experience. Webinar Replay: Record and share webinars with analytics for audience engagement. Download: Zoom 64-bit | 145.0 MB (Free, paid upgrade available) Links: Zoom Website | Zoom ARM64 | Zoom Installers | Release Notes Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • UK funds £60M AI labs to challenge US tech dominance with open-source models by Paul Hill The UK government has awarded £60 million to Oxford University and University College London to help keep the country in the AI race by focusing on open-source, low-hardware alternatives. This is in stark contrast to the expensive, closed-source, and high-hardware-requirement models being created in the United States and elsewhere. The money will be shared among two new academic research labs over six years to help them redesign the fundamental mathematics and architectures of AI to help the UK reduce its reliance on a handful of US tech firms. Commenting on the development, AI Minister Kanishka Narayan said: Initially, the government planned to fund just one lab with a £40 million investment, but with this update, two labs will now get access to a larger pool of funds. The labs are expected to invest in the top AI researchers at every career stage, with £2 million per lab being set aside for hiring at least ten doctoral students. The government hopes that this will grow the UK’s talent in the field of AI. The labs are also expected to work closely with the leaders in British AI research, such as the Alan Turing Institute and UKRI’s AI research hubs. This will allow the various teams to collaborate and create new solutions faster than they could alone. This development is pretty interesting for a number of reasons, chiefly that it could create a long-term challenge for US tech firms if these labs successfully scale these open-source architectures that bypass the proprietary ecosystems. It could also give British businesses and public sector organizations access to AI features without paying high licensing fees to foreign providers or needing to invest in specialized server infrastructure.
    • If I were them, I'm gonna hold out until the prices of these semiconductor parts normalize. $1,049 for a ~5 year old hardware is DoA, more so for gamers. On a deeper note, if Steam Machine is priced like this, we are soo effed up for the next gen Xbox console and PS6. With great AAA titles releasing at the end of the year, this just creates more demand...and more tears for me. Lol.
    • I suspect one reason its hard to justify subsidising is that it's not a locked down device like a traditional console is. In this climate sadly if it was a "good deal" you'd get people hoarding them for anything but gaming. The Lenovo Legion Go 2 with the Ryzen Z2 Extreme is £1300 here ($1720) for some context on how other SteamOS like devices are now priced. I got the older Z1 Extreme model for £300 with a dock, just shows how insane prices have got recently.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      464
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      183
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      89
    5. 5
      neufuse
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!