That's not even an Al Pacino cameo. He's the focal point of the movie. The plot of Jack and Jill is to get Al Pacino to sell product placement.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Red Letter Media |OT| of Movies, Murderers, and Pizza Rolls
- Thread starter Skiptastic
- Start date
ultracal31
You don't get to bring friends.
brianmcdoogle
Member
Wrote in the OT thread, but the more I think about it, the more I'm disappointed that Mike didn't go into Ghostbusters 2 at all, especially when he was comparing the 2016 reboot with the original. Mike really disliked Ghostbusters 2, and in a way, I think the review might have been stronger if he used it and the 2016 reboot to illustrate just how good the first movie is, and that no matter what, either doing a reboot which is a beat for beat recreation of the first movie, or the sequel which is a beat for beat recreation of the first movie, just doesn't work, and that maybe it was all lightning in a bottle that first time out.
Also, it would have been nice for him to tear into Ghostbusters 2 since most haven't heard their commentary, and it is still a loved film, despite having a ton of problems, like Last Crusade compared to Raiders.
Also, it would have been nice for him to tear into Ghostbusters 2 since most haven't heard their commentary, and it is still a loved film, despite having a ton of problems, like Last Crusade compared to Raiders.
Admiral Woofington
Member
I love the Last Crusade so much and I've never said as much online because I'd get eaten alive.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Last Crusade has Sean Connery in it soooo
brianmcdoogle
Member
The Last Crusade is a screwball comedy featuring the characters of the Raiders series in a blandly directed, inoffensive romp. I enjoy it for what it is, but it's not a good movie and certainly not a good Raiders movie. It's one of the go-to "it's not a good movie, but I enjoy it".
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
this plinkett review felt like a return to form after the last couple.
really don't like how comedies nowadays are basically just actors improvving non-stop with no restraint. its a problem with all modern comedies.
show some restraint
really don't like how comedies nowadays are basically just actors improvving non-stop with no restraint. its a problem with all modern comedies.
show some restraint
I watched it, but it's only cause I knew these guys were funny.
Never saw GB2016 so I can't compare, but it seemed like a good analysis on the faults of the film with some jokes that made me laugh (Plinkett's jokes that is).
Though Christ, GB videos bring out the worst comments. Can't we just run jokes into the ground instead?
Never saw GB2016 so I can't compare, but it seemed like a good analysis on the faults of the film with some jokes that made me laugh (Plinkett's jokes that is).
Though Christ, GB videos bring out the worst comments. Can't we just run jokes into the ground instead?
Sure director and writer, that was NOT product placement for Pringles. It's just a coincidence that the label was always pointing toward the camera in every scene no matter the angle. Just a fluke, yup.
broncobuster
Banned
I kept thinking it probably would've served the review better if it compared it with 21 Jump Street.
So I had never seen a plinkett review before that one, I'm new to red letter media in general to be honest. So I click the next reccomended video, his thing on the force awakens, and... this one is not as good as the ghost busters video.
The ghost busters video is shorter, and actively talks about differences in film making, between ghost busters, and ghost busters 2016 in ways that made me look at the film differently. This force awakens thing so far is him talking about a theory, and being upset people younger than him might like the prequels unironically, not acknowledging that he has limited knowledge of the star wars franchises and how it does outside of his perceived view of star wars suggesting that " all things star wars using the older things as marketing material" which is kind of factually untrue. He's essentially just being mad at people thinking differently from him or being younger than him. Or both
Are all plinkett reviews just... that?
The ghost busters video is shorter, and actively talks about differences in film making, between ghost busters, and ghost busters 2016 in ways that made me look at the film differently. This force awakens thing so far is him talking about a theory, and being upset people younger than him might like the prequels unironically, not acknowledging that he has limited knowledge of the star wars franchises and how it does outside of his perceived view of star wars suggesting that " all things star wars using the older things as marketing material" which is kind of factually untrue. He's essentially just being mad at people thinking differently from him or being younger than him. Or both
Are all plinkett reviews just... that?
brotkasten
Member
I'd say that the general consensus of the TFA review is that it's easily the worst of his. If you want to get into Plinkett reviews, start with the prequel trilogy. There's no way around it.
Spehornoob
Member
The TFA review is weird in part because it's not really a TFA review. It's much more about the revival of the Star Wars brand and how it fits into Stoklasa's (highly cynical) view on modern blockbuster filmmaking. That, combined with the weird Ring Theory tangent, made it really different than other Plinkett reviews.
Every other Plinkett review is closer to the Ghostbusters review. Though they do tend to have a lot more dark humor.
Plinkett is at his best when he's tearing a bad film a new asshole AND showing why a comparable, older film did things better, disproving all the bullshit "You just like the old one because nostalgia" arguments.
I think a Plinkett review for Rogue One could work well for this reason.
I think a Plinkett review for Rogue One could work well for this reason.
Ok thanks i'll check some other things out. Because if I just wanted to see an older person get mad at younger demo's for liking things they grew up with. One, I could just have a conversation with myself about transfomers. But two, there are plenty of youtubers I don't watch that do that. That shit I feel creates an over insular circle that doesn't really allow for new view points.
But if the rest of his reviews actually have insightful points, i'll check em out
But if the rest of his reviews actually have insightful points, i'll check em out
Watching the commentary feels kinda like a Plinkett reviews here and there.
I like rlm in general, even the stupid shit but I couldn't finish the TFA review. I spent I think 40 minutes and I didn't even laugh or smile a single time
"It was in the script for her to say the catch phrase of the product"
Spieler Eins
Member
Start with the Episode 1 review. It's a top-tier analysis that doesn't resort to cheap "Jar Jar Binks suckssss" shots even once. If you still don't like, you might want to bail out (but I doubt it if you already liked the Ghostbusters one).
Admiral Woofington
Member
What's the catchphrase of papa Johns?
Papa John's. If it doesn't give you diarrhea, pizzas on us
The Broken Ska Record
Member
I mean, Sony is all about product placement. It's their raison d'être.
I believe it's "you're fired because of Obamacare".
broncobuster
Banned
I don't mind product placement within reason, when it doesn't come off like a commercial in the movie. Ghostbuster 2016's Papa John stuff does. Iron Man 3 and Captain America Winter Soldier do as well. Using Sony camcorders or Audi cars as props is what it is. I don't mind that stuff.
At the same time, I love the Back to the Future series and 1&2 are full of in your face product placements. I don't know. Maybe it's that they do something interesting by showing the future versions of the products.
At the same time, I love the Back to the Future series and 1&2 are full of in your face product placements. I don't know. Maybe it's that they do something interesting by showing the future versions of the products.
poipoipoi9
Member
Was that Papa John's commercial thing really in the final movie? Or is it a joke by RLM?
The Broken Ska Record
Member
It was a commercial that was running before GB was in theatres. But there are PJ products in the movie.
The catchphrase is "our owner doesn't blink in any of our fucking commercials and it weirds me out"
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
I never minded the Sony branded props because they have to have some sort of computer might as well go the easy way and use one without any changes.
That papa johns stuff is another level though.
That papa johns stuff is another level though.
Admiral Woofington
Member
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Admiral Woofington
Member
The Real Abed
Perma-Junior
Okay so I'm finally watching the Plinkett review and something keeps bugging me. I assume it's meant for the 3D version but the special effects breaking out of the frame into the letterboxing is really really off-putting. Is this on all the Blu-Rays of this film? Because it is terrible. I mean I'm sure if you're watching in a theater with 3D glasses it probably enhances the experience. But every time it happens in these clips it just makes me feel like it's wrong. It doesn't need to happen. But it does. I don't like it.
Anyone wanna put more input on that? Has any other film release done this? Was it like that in the theater? Was it like that for all releases or just 3D? Why does it exist? Why does it happen? And why do I find it so annoying? Anyone else?
Anyone wanna put more input on that? Has any other film release done this? Was it like that in the theater? Was it like that for all releases or just 3D? Why does it exist? Why does it happen? And why do I find it so annoying? Anyone else?
I don't know about Ghostbusters, but the IMAX version of Fantastic Beasts did that and it was very distracting.
http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1534640/how-ghostbusters-totally-breaks-the-norm-when-it-comes-to-3d
Paul Feig said:
Paul Feig said:
The Real Abed
Perma-Junior
Well I really don't like it. And I really hate that the whole gimmick of 3D in many cases is just to "throw stuff in the audiences face".
Bad form, Paul Feig. Bad form.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
That popping out of the frame thing is on both the 2D and 3D Blu-rays.
I also have a UHD disc here but no way to look at it.
It's not on either cut of the movie when streaming in 1080p on Vudu.
I actually like it.
I also have a UHD disc here but no way to look at it.
It's not on either cut of the movie when streaming in 1080p on Vudu.
I actually like it.
The Real Abed
Perma-Junior
Gotta have that cinematic widescreen experience.
Which gets ruined when you have special effects leaking out of the movie.
It's like it's supposed to happen so fast you aren't supposed to notice it. But like Tyler Durden once said, "You don't know you've seen it, but you have." Though he was talking about something totally different.
I wish Plinkett had said something about it. I don't think Jay or Mike mentioned it either. I guess no one else cares.
The Broken Ska Record
Member
I like the effects breaking the frame. 
Spieler Eins
Member
Where was Apes 3? Frauds.
reptilescorpio
Member
Yeah I jumped in here to see if they'd already said they aren't going to review it. Thought they'd be keen for it tbh.
Been over a month since the last HitB!
Might be a while, we don't get another Marvel movie until November.
brotkasten
Member
I'd rather have one Best of the Worst than 3 HitB episodes. It's not like they have anything interesting or insightful to say about new movies.