plagiarize
Banned
Why didn't everyone shit on Vacation for casting Chris Hemsworth as a dumb sexy weatherman?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Ghostbusters Trailer 2
- Thread starter xRaizen
- Start date
- Status
I think most people stopped at Ed Helms.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Expand on that. Otherwise it would be impossible to take anything you post seriously.
There were a multitude of other problems, and that would imply anyone even saw that piece of shit.
Was he in the trailers?
thelatestmodel
Junior, please.
Desperately unfunny. I feel like I need to take a shower after seeing that.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Because that movie wasn't in the center of an internet culture war.
People already hated it when the only information we had about this was "Ghostbusters with female cast".
Salty Rice
Member
Because even if its not saying much it was the best part of the movie?
He wasnt cringe worthy in the trailer either.
plagiarize
Banned
Yes he was. Being all dumb and sexy. I'm not sure that it established him as a weather man though.
But that runs contrary to the premise of the social commentary. The script can't answer what is being proposed.
The setup is that they are playing off of an old stereotype, and the payoff is that they are either going to subvert the stereotype (as in "9 to 5"), or lampoon the stereotype (something you might see in a Naked Gun or National Lampoon movie).
I just don't understand the basis for the commentary. It would be like if Kristen Wiig was acting like a stereotype of a black person and calling Leslie Jones "my nigga" throughout the movie. It's not that the stereotype or commentary are invalid, it's just that it doesn't belong. The setup (social commentary) for such a character does not exist within a Ghostbusters movie. It's the wrong movie for this type of joke.
I have no problem with social commentary. It's the lazy, sloppy writing that bothers me.
Inferno313
Banned
I mean, both things are an angry internet nerd thing. The CoD thing is angry internet nerds being angry at the mainstream thing. The Ghostbusters thing is angry internet nerds being angry at the lady thing.
Hopefully jumping to half baked conclusions isn't the extent of your exercise regimen.
Not quite. I think Melissa McCarthy to be a bit more specific.
Pretty much feel the exact same way. That was the only part that got a legitimate chuckle.
It's definitely a better trailer than the first, and the visuals are quite outstanding, but it just doesn't seem all that funny or interesting.
I'll definitely see it sometime, but it's down to reviews now as to whether not I'll see it in theaters.
Lol, touché Bobby.
Same here, I think looking bck my parents wwere suprisingly lax with what they let me watch.
I'm still in the same boat as before.
It doesn't look horrible.
It doesn't look good either.
And it sure as hell doesn't look like a worthy successor to Ghostbusters 1 and 2.
The humor just doesn't click with me. I've never really enjoyed a comedy movie by Feig before, so that's not too surprising.
On the other hand, I loved his work on Mad Men, so I still had some hope left...
It doesn't look horrible.
It doesn't look good either.
And it sure as hell doesn't look like a worthy successor to Ghostbusters 1 and 2.
The humor just doesn't click with me. I've never really enjoyed a comedy movie by Feig before, so that's not too surprising.
On the other hand, I loved his work on Mad Men, so I still had some hope left...
Except that a lot of people would have given it the benefit of the doubt, if the trailers were good.
They aren't.
Yes, there were crazies hating it before we saw anything. But like the racists & Star Wars, that was a minority.
Pretty much this.
DeadRockstar
Member
The selfie joke at the end was pretty good.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Almost every single thread on NeoGAF about the new film had numerous people posting their grievances about the cast (when all we knew was that it was four women).
It's quite the shock, haha. Sent me into
toxic shock
Alex_Mexico
Member
So you're telling me people are complaining because Hemsworth was cast as the hot secretary instead of all the other billion movies where it's always the other way around? People can't handle one movie that reverses a paradigm?
I don't care what the internet says. From these two trailers I made my mind and I'll watch this film.
There are tons of shit movies out there that I'm willing to bet have more likes than dislikes on their trailers. Don't delude yourself.
Well I would LIKE to think that was the case. We'll see in time if that's true. I just know personally I thought the first trailer was not great but this one is way better.
Liquidsnake
Banned
I didn't laugh or smile at any of the jokes.
Im sure there's a lot of you that will like this movie, Ill watch it once it comes to VOD.
Just doesn't do much for me. I actually like the casting. Its pretty damn good. It just looks like the script maybe came up short. I don't know. Maybe im wrong, and the movie will be amazing, but to ask me if I am excited, the answer is no.
Kirsten Wiig I heart you so much.
Also the race thing, lady thing was just really uncomfortable to watch.
Im sure there's a lot of you that will like this movie, Ill watch it once it comes to VOD.
Just doesn't do much for me. I actually like the casting. Its pretty damn good. It just looks like the script maybe came up short. I don't know. Maybe im wrong, and the movie will be amazing, but to ask me if I am excited, the answer is no.
Kirsten Wiig I heart you so much.
Also the race thing, lady thing was just really uncomfortable to watch.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Definitely better.
I'll watch it for sure, there's no doubt about it. Whether I like it is to be seen.
I'll watch it for sure, there's no doubt about it. Whether I like it is to be seen.
So a minority.
I know some people like to think otherwise, but GAF is a small minority and does not reflect most people.
Hell, there are smaller groups within GAF.
Inferno313
Banned
Star Wars was actually kind of cagey about if Rey was entirely the lead, at least in the trailers. They gave Finn equal screentime and weight, and even alluded that he'd be wielding the lightsaber in the film.
Meanwhile, The first Ghostbusters trailer literally had no lines from men. Which I think is pretty great, but it's easy to see why that would enrage a certain audience more than the Star Wars trailers did.
Loved Spy, liked Bridesmaids, despised The Heat. I love Katie Dippolds writing on Parks And Rec but her movie work has been really suspect.
starchild excalibur
Member
I'd never thought the crowd surfing joke would prompt as much debate as it did - especially since it's been shown before. The joke isn't that the crowd is racist or anti-woman, but that Leslie Jones is so quick to temper that it's what she automatically defaults to assuming those are the only reasons there could have been for them not catching her.
For the number of people who complain about the rise of jokes being spelled out in films, I can understand why maybe some films go that route. All that scene needs is someone in the crowd to yell out in the distance, "It's cos you're big!" at this point.
Pretty much. I can't help but chuckle when I see so many comments objecting to Chris Hemsworth playing a dumb hottie when that shit is still fairly standard for females in most films even today. The minute a guy is cast in that role it suddenly "reeks" of man-hatting gender-swapping to some folks.
For the number of people who complain about the rise of jokes being spelled out in films, I can understand why maybe some films go that route. All that scene needs is someone in the crowd to yell out in the distance, "It's cos you're big!" at this point.
Pretty much. I can't help but chuckle when I see so many comments objecting to Chris Hemsworth playing a dumb hottie when that shit is still fairly standard for females in most films even today. The minute a guy is cast in that role it suddenly "reeks" of man-hatting gender-swapping to some folks.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Yet one would not expect NeoGAF to be the place to find people who would do that, given that NeoGAF members tend to be a little more progressive on such matters.
plagiarize
Banned
I don't think you are sexist. I think you are worried about bad things happening to men in a push back against sexism.
This is a viewpoint I can empathize with and understand. I'm not accusing you of being sexist. I am trying to get a simple point across to you, which is that "Hot dumb secretaries aren't just women" isn't a remotely sexist statement.
Yes, Kevin is there to highlight sexism in Hollywood. You can call this pandering if you want. I think it's a director making a statement that they really care about. We can only speculate to his 'true' intentions.
But here is the thing.
Imagine being part of a group that time and again have been discriminated against and stereotyped as stupid. Someone makes a movie that shows a different type of person as stupid.
Fill in the blanks with whatever you want.
That group start saying. "No one should be painted as stupid. We agree that you should never have been painted this way. The solution isn't to show that we can be stupid too."
But to you it sounds an awful lot like "You can only have equality if it we don't have to have things even the tiniest bit worse." The group that haven't suffered, are trying to dictate the terms under which you stop suffering, and trying to control how you are allowed to criticize and campaign for having things balance out fairly.
See? You are telling women who have seen themselves portrayed negatively that they can only have equality if men don't get portrayed negatively at any point. This is exactly what people mean when they speak about privledge. It's almost always unconscious.
No one wants things worse than they currently have it. But people who have things much worse than you aren't going to respond well to being told they can only have things better, if you get to keep having things just as well as you currently do.
DataStream
Member
First trailer had me /facepalm a bit. I was beyond hype given the cast, I'd basically watch Kristen Wiig eat an apple for an hour and be entertained.
This is much more like it, hype renewed.
This is much more like it, hype renewed.
No, Melissa is also a big woman.
They wanted a joke where one person jumps and is caught, and then when the other person jumps, they are dropped. Usually this would be a "cool guy" and a "loser guy" type of joke, but the premise doesn't allow for such a thing.
So they just said "fuck it" and did the joke anyways, having it hinge loosely on racism, which doesn't work as a pay off because there's no setup for it.
No, it's because like the mosh pit joke they knew they wanted it but had no setup or payoff for the concept.
starchild excalibur
Member
Melissa McCarthy is 5'2".
Leslie Jones is 6'.
Yes, McCarthy isn't thin, but compared to Jones' frame she's definitely much easier to catch. I agree that the joke would have worked better if it was McKinnon or Wiig crowd surfing first, but McCarthy is in no way some whale of a woman to catch with her diminutive height.
DeathoftheEndless
Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
The RT % and Metacritic score were false idols. The Youtube Likes/Dislikes number is now king of opinion metrics.
The Auxiliary
Member
Looks fun, why are people hatin?
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I thought it looked a little bit better than the last one. That crowdsurfing joke is stupid, and didn't work in the international trailer. The tone is a little more clear, and it's not as "slapstick" looking as it seemed previously - it appears those loud moments are less the norm and more like punctuation/exclamation points at the end of more measured, smartass(ish) build-ups.
It still doesn't look great, but it doesn't look like a total dogfuck of a missed opportunity, either. So that's a step up. Not the highest of bars, of course, but still.
People don't like it still. Which makes sense, and is perfectly fine, as it's not all that good still, so I don't see how this one commercial is going to move the needle all that much. I'm not surprised by responses ranging from disappointment to apathetic. I'd probably place my reaction a little closer to the "ehhhh" side than anything, if I had to pin it down.
But that explanation is also a little different from volunteering information about hitting the dislike button (much less prefacing it with the phrase "I did my part!"), in the same way Rolfe made a video telling people he wasn't going to watch a movie: It's an unneccessary inflammation of the discussion for the sake of grandstanding.
But grandstanding can be fun. Lord knows I indulge from time to time. You might notice this soapbox under my Hobbity feet right now, even!
Here's the thing: If you're going to put a very strong premium on your agency and measured response to the film's marketing based solely on somewhat-objective analysis of its content, then you also need to not be an insecure little shit hyper-focused on the possibility someone somewhere (but not here) is maybe thinking you're sexist for it.
Multiple criticisms of a thing can exist at the same time. Pointing out one doesn't nullify all the others. You don't need to erase or diminish the existence of one in order to bolster the strength of your own. They can co-exist, and stand (or fall) on their own merits.
Your feeling nervous about possibly getting tarred by a brush that doesn't apply to you is a perfectly understandable and reasonable reaction. Your using that nervousness and insecurity to either pre-empt all other conversation as a means to make others appear foolish for addressing an aspect of the argument you don't identify with isn't actually helping you out. It's making you look shitty. It makes you look like you doth protest too much.
Your insecurities regarding the potential of being labeled as a sexist aren't anyone else's problem but your own. You can either laugh at 'em and let 'em dissipate, or you can let 'em burn and fuel your continued grandstanding and picking fights with people who aren't directly addressing your merit-based arguments.
Now if a poster directly addresses you, responds to your quote, or even passive-aggressively references something you know you wrote, directly addressing that poster and rebutting their claims makes all the sense in the world. Nobody would take exception to that. It's a straight ahead "No, that's incorrect, let me clarify" sorta situation.
But we get into problems in these Ghostbusters threads for two reasons.
1) People wanna talk about the sexism aspect more than they wanna talk about the movie
2) People wanna protect their movie-based opinion by pretending the sexism aspect isn't really a factor at all - anywhere.
At which point it just becomes a tussle over whether sexism exists and how uber-sensitive people are being by paying attention to it.
Which is kinda tiresome, as you've seen.
Anyway, there's my big fat futile attempt at reason for this thread.
It still doesn't look great, but it doesn't look like a total dogfuck of a missed opportunity, either. So that's a step up. Not the highest of bars, of course, but still.
People don't like it still. Which makes sense, and is perfectly fine, as it's not all that good still, so I don't see how this one commercial is going to move the needle all that much. I'm not surprised by responses ranging from disappointment to apathetic. I'd probably place my reaction a little closer to the "ehhhh" side than anything, if I had to pin it down.
But that explanation is also a little different from volunteering information about hitting the dislike button (much less prefacing it with the phrase "I did my part!"), in the same way Rolfe made a video telling people he wasn't going to watch a movie: It's an unneccessary inflammation of the discussion for the sake of grandstanding.
But grandstanding can be fun. Lord knows I indulge from time to time. You might notice this soapbox under my Hobbity feet right now, even!
Here's the thing: If you're going to put a very strong premium on your agency and measured response to the film's marketing based solely on somewhat-objective analysis of its content, then you also need to not be an insecure little shit hyper-focused on the possibility someone somewhere (but not here) is maybe thinking you're sexist for it.
Multiple criticisms of a thing can exist at the same time. Pointing out one doesn't nullify all the others. You don't need to erase or diminish the existence of one in order to bolster the strength of your own. They can co-exist, and stand (or fall) on their own merits.
Your feeling nervous about possibly getting tarred by a brush that doesn't apply to you is a perfectly understandable and reasonable reaction. Your using that nervousness and insecurity to either pre-empt all other conversation as a means to make others appear foolish for addressing an aspect of the argument you don't identify with isn't actually helping you out. It's making you look shitty. It makes you look like you doth protest too much.
Your insecurities regarding the potential of being labeled as a sexist aren't anyone else's problem but your own. You can either laugh at 'em and let 'em dissipate, or you can let 'em burn and fuel your continued grandstanding and picking fights with people who aren't directly addressing your merit-based arguments.
Now if a poster directly addresses you, responds to your quote, or even passive-aggressively references something you know you wrote, directly addressing that poster and rebutting their claims makes all the sense in the world. Nobody would take exception to that. It's a straight ahead "No, that's incorrect, let me clarify" sorta situation.
But we get into problems in these Ghostbusters threads for two reasons.
1) People wanna talk about the sexism aspect more than they wanna talk about the movie
2) People wanna protect their movie-based opinion by pretending the sexism aspect isn't really a factor at all - anywhere.
At which point it just becomes a tussle over whether sexism exists and how uber-sensitive people are being by paying attention to it.
Which is kinda tiresome, as you've seen.
Anyway, there's my big fat futile attempt at reason for this thread.
Young kids are now in control. The old people warned us about this.
plagiarize
Banned
I thought this post was great.
Some will say "women." Some will say episodes of the cartoon series look creepier.
New trailer barely had any jokes in it.
I did think the bit at the end with her walking away with the bat thing and someone taking a selfie was funny. Other than that one joke, everything fell flat.
The best thing the movie has going for it are some of the visuals which look pretty damn great.
I did think the bit at the end with her walking away with the bat thing and someone taking a selfie was funny. Other than that one joke, everything fell flat.
The best thing the movie has going for it are some of the visuals which look pretty damn great.
- Status