Support NeoGAF

[BamfMeat]

I don't agree with you.

It's a solid rebuttal.

Also, you're using the "Argument from fallacy" or "Fallacy fallacy." An argument that contains fallacies can still be true. The presence of a fallacy doesn't negate an argument.



General movie-goers may not recognize Paul Feig by name, but they know of Bridesmaids and Spy.

That article was actually a really great article. And it pointed out something I hadn't really thought about until it - maybe it's not so much about sexism, *per say*, maybe it's this at it's root:

He talks about how important this “franchise” is to him, how he grew up with it, how he wants kids to know the originals. The subtext here is very simple: you’re making a new version of this thing that I love and you are not making it for me. And that pisses him off. And he doesn’t realize that the root of all this, the root of feeling like someone betrayed his Ghostbusters, comes down to the fact that these Ghostbusters don’t look like him.

To me, that can be "soft" sexism (as the article calls it), and that makes sense to me more than anything. It's not a conscious sexism, it's just a "this is different than what I like/want to see/feel good about."

Not making a blanket statement, but the (straight) guys I generally talk to can't relate to women. I don't know why, I don't get it, but when the conversation comes up, it's always "I can't be friends with chicks - if I'm hanging out with chicks, I just want to bang them." They aren't open enough to say "chick friends could be cool."

Again, not to make a blanket statement, but most guys aren't going to find those ladies "attractive" in the traditional sense. The guys can't even go see the movie because they're not hot eye-candy that they want to bang. So instead of just accepting it and moving on, all these things taken together, they're having to bang this drum of "WORST MOVIE EVER".

Taken at it's root, it's all sexism, right? But I don't think it's a conscious thing that immediately their minds jump to "ITS WOMEN SO IT'S BAD!" - more like "I can't relate to them because THEY HAVE VAGINES AND I DONT WANT TO BONE THEM!"

The unfortunate part is, they aren't self-aware enough to even get that far in their analysis of themselves. Those same guys I talk about above, when I point out that they're idiots for thinking that way they say "Well that's just guys". No it's not. You can be self-aware and realize that regardless of your attraction to a woman, they have a personality, they have likes and dislikes and shockingly, they might even line up with yours! But nope - if they don't want to bang her, they don't want to hang with her....

Sorry that's another conversation for another day.

One thing about the final paragraph:



I found this part odd, as if the intended audience of a movie is limited by who stars in it. The old Ghostbusters starred men, so it was "for men". This new Ghostbusters stars women, so it's "for women". Am I the only one who finds this odd?

As if women can only relate to female characters, and men can only relate to male characters. As if the two genders are like completely two different species, with no common characteristics or humanity to empathize with. I don't need a new Alien movie for men, I can relate to Ripley just fine. Can't a little boy see a reflection of themselves in Rey? Not gender-wise, but in terms of, I dunno, being courageous? Can't a little girl see a reflection of themselves in Harry Potter? Maybe she has an older brother who's like Dudley, and can relate that way. This kind of mentality just divides the genders further.

Put it way better and more wrapped up than I did.

 

[Volimar]

I've never been a fan of Ghost Busters and I hate Melissa McCarthy... but visually it looks really cool.

Why does everyone hate this trailer?

I kinda wish this was taking place in the original universe. Then I'd be completely alright with Slimer and Mr. Stay Puft showing up here.

Was that Stay Puft or just a ginormous ghost?

 

[longdi]

Am i the only one who thinks TMNT2 looking waaay better than this?

This look so cheesy and try-hard. They have gone for some slap-stick humour. /faceplam

 

[Rabbi_Vole]

Faith in Paul Feig is the only hope some of us have.

I think it's pretty well placed. How many times does he have to "surprise" everyone before he's cut some slack?

 

[stufte]

Am i the only one who thinks TMNT2 looking waaay better than this?

This look so cheesy and try-hard. They have gone for some slap-stick humour. /faceplam

I was actually surprised that I liked the most recent TMNT2 trailer. It actually felt like a legit Turtles movie, unlike the first one.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

That wasn't bad at all. I think I'll like it.

 

[Sanjuro]

I think it's pretty well placed. How many times does he have to "surprise" everyone before he's cut some slack?

When that hack gives us season two of Other Space.

 

[Volimar]

I think it's pretty well placed. How many times does he have to "surprise" everyone before he's cut some slack?

I'm betting the reviews most people will give it is "I went in with low expectations and it was better than I thought." Maybe it won't be great, but I doubt it's the stinker a lot of people are expecting.

 

[B33]

Pixels comparison based on adverts is very fair.

Do you know something we don't? Otherwise your statement is off base.

I don't see how it's hyperbolic at all. The tone and set-up of both movies seems pretty similar based solely on advertisements.

Haha, where was I being hyperbolic?

I've watched my Adam Sandler movies with younger cousins or right before watching a RLM review.

I'd say calling hyperbole over Pixels is weird.

Lots of similarities based on ads alone.

Arguing that two films are identical because you've seen collectively ten minutes of one film and the entirety of another constitutes as hyperbole.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Still not feeling it.

 

[Sanjuro]

Arguing that two films are identical because you've seen collectively ten minutes of one film and the entirety of another constitutes as hyperbole.

You are comparing two films produced by Sony, with SNL alumni, featuring bombastic colorful CGI shooting creatures, with two leads (Sandler & McCarthy) who regularly face similar criticism, banking on nostalgia to drive audiences...

Yeah. Nothing about them are alike!

 

[longdi]

Yes..yes the style of this trailer reminded me of Pixels! I bet Sony re-used some cgi assets here. The original GBs weren't as gags-y as this...

Who is this Paul Feig? Why should i put faith in him?

 

[Ran rp]

I'm betting the reviews most people will give it is "I went in with low expectations and it was better than I thought." Maybe it won't be great, but I doubt it's the stinker a lot of people are expecting.

this is how i feel about the trailer lol. still think it'll be a mediocre film, tho.

 

[stufte]

Arguing that two films are identical because you've seen collectively ten minutes of one film and the entirety of another constitutes as hyperbole.

Now who's being hyperbolic? Where did I or anyone you quoted say that they were identical? The tone feels similar, the trailers for both movies seem to have been produced in a similar way.

 

[BatDan]

Yes..yes the style of this trailer reminded me of Pixels! I bet Sony re-used some cgi assets here. The original GBs weren't as gags-y as this...

Who is this Paul Feig? Why should i put faith in him?

This guy

 

[ExVicis]

I don't agree with you.

It's a solid rebuttal.

Also, you're using the "Argument from fallacy" or "Fallacy fallacy." An argument that contains fallacies can still be true. The presence of a fallacy doesn't negate an argument.

I almost thought it was a okay article until...

It’s the standard ‘Won’t somebody think of the children?’ defense that comes up when a reactionary, regressive group tries to attack the rights of others. And man, wouldn’t you know it - the “Angry Video Game Nerd” takes some time to ask why somebody won’t think of the children who will grow up only knowing THIS version of Ghostbusters.

If this isn't false equivalency it's pretty goddamn close.

 

[plagiarize]

One thing about the final paragraph:



I found this part odd, as if the intended audience of a movie is limited by who stars in it. The old Ghostbusters starred men, so it was "for men". This new Ghostbusters stars women, so it's "for women". Am I the only one who finds this odd?

As if women can only relate to female characters, and men can only relate to male characters. As if the two genders are like completely two different species, with no common characteristics or humanity to empathize with. I don't need a new Alien movie for men, I can relate to Ripley just fine. Can't a little boy see a reflection of themselves in Rey? Not gender-wise, but in terms of, I dunno, being courageous? Can't a little girl see a reflection of themselves in Harry Potter? Maybe she has an older brother who's like Dudley, and can relate that way. This kind of mentality just divides the genders further.

Unfortunately (and not unsurprisingly given how many adults seem to struggle with such things) children really do find it hard to see themselves in characters of different races and genders.

I don't think we put the blame on the six year olds. Kids do limit what they imagine they can be based on what they see in media. That's why we as adults have a responsibility to provide kids of all walks of life with role models.

That's why making sure heroes come in all walks and sizes matters so much.

Look as a kid, I remember being made fun of by my friends because I thought She-Ra was awesome. 'But She-Ra is for girls!'. I learnt to shut up about it pretty fast. But I didn't see her as a role model like I did Egon, who was a guy who was into science and wore glasses like me.

I guess I was just a dumb 5 year old for not being able to see myself in a female concert violinist who lived in an expensive apartment right on Central Park West.

 

[B33]

You are comparing two films produced by Sony, with SNL alumni, featuring bombastic colorful CGI shooting creatures, with two leads (Sandler & McCarthy) who regularly face similar criticism, banking on nostalgia to drive audiences...

Yeah. Nothing about them are alike!

All I see are superficial comparisons.

A lot of comedies have featured SNL alumni. So what?

Many blockbusters feature "colorful CGI." So what?

McCarthy and Sandler both being cast in a film doesn't make the two films identical.

Where have you been? MANY Hollywood projects bank off of nostalgia and will continue to do so.

Now who's being hyperbolic? Where did I or anyone you quoted say that they were identical? The tone feels similar, the trailers for both movies seem to have been produced in a similar way.

The only similarity is that Sony produced both trailers (and they're comedies). The argument that the two projects look "similar" as a slight against Ghostbusters is superficial.

 

[BrahReally]

I'm not emotionally invested in the old Ghostbusters film (mostly because I don't really care for it to the extent that most people do because I honestly never found it that great of a movie). With that being said, in my opinion, this second trailer for the movie looks more than serviceable... I definitely feel like it's the, "it" thing to to do regarding disliking the trailers for this film.


All I can imagine is some, "epic may-may le reddit XD nostalgia roolz!!!" group going around disliking it, to me it looks like it could be an alright movie.

 

[213372bu]

All I see are superficial comparisons.

A lot of comedies have featured SNL alumni. So what?

Many blockbusters feature "colorful CGI." So what?

McCarthy and Sandler both being cast in a film doesn't make the two films identical.

Where have you been? MANY Hollywood projects bank off of nostalgia and will continue to do so.

I only commented on how you called other people's first impressions on ads "hyperbolic".

Not sure why you need to quote me twice to defend yourself on another position.

 

[Sanjuro]

All I see are superficial comparisons.

A lot of comedies have featured SNL alumni. So what?

Many blockbusters feature "colorful CGI." So what?

McCarthy and Sandler both being cast in a film doesn't make the two films identical.

Where have you been? MANY Hollywood projects bank off of nostalgia and will continue to do so.

...umm...

I mean, you can't be this oblivious? Nobody is comparing the films in their entirety pound for pound.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Definitely a much better trailer. Still didn't laugh once and it doesn't appear to be a good movie. The humor seems like almost exclusively trendy boiler-plate irreverent sarcasm. Hopefully the full movie has a stronger personality.

 

[TheLegendOfMart]

Why shouldn't it "pander" to fans of the original film? This movie wouldn't exist without the originals, Feig wouldnt be getting a huge payday if it werent for the origjinals and the fanbase of the originals existing, paying respect to them should be a given not a choice.

They've been trying for years to get Ghostbusters 3 going and then Harold Ramis died.

This reboot doesn't affect the original films in any way whatsoever, you were never going to get another original Ghostbusters film if this didn't get made so I don't get why people are so up in arms about it.

 

[Inferno313]

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/18/the-soft-sexism-of-hating-on-the-new-ghostbusters

Would you look at that. Somebody else did it for me.

This is exactly what I was trying to say in the other thread, albiet better worded. I got called a liar, was told I was making things up, and was accused of making "baseless accusations of sexism." This film brings out the best in people.

 

[eFKac]

Not one joke really landed for me, only thing that made me chuckle is the first shot ofChris Hemsworth's silly character. The black lady is terrible with that stereotypical overexaggeration...

Love the visuals though.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Well, it was better than the first one anyway. That ghost shoulder part was pretty funny.

 

[thecouncil]

Yes..yes the style of this trailer reminded me of Pixels! I bet Sony re-used some cgi assets here. The original GBs weren't as gags-y as this...

Who is this Paul Feig? Why should i put faith in him?

Sabrina the Teenage Witch's teacher.

 

[disappeared]

Decent trailer, although yeah I'm a little bummed they showed a little too much.

 

[B33]

I only commented on how you called other people's first impressions on ads "hyperbolic".

Not sure why you need to quote me twice to defend yourself on another position.

I quoted you again by accident. Sorry.

...umm...

I mean, you can't be this oblivious? Nobody is comparing the films in their entirety pound for pound.

What's the point of arguing both films look "similar"?

This is how it breaks down: "Ghostbusters looks similar to Pixels, therefore Ghostbusters looks like a bad movie." That's a superficial argument and it doesn't mean anything. The trailer for Spy looked atrocious and it turned out to be good.

Arguing that one film is similar to another based entirely off the trailer is the same sort of logic used by people who thought Pacific Rim looked like Transformers based only on the trailers for Pacific Rim.

Denigrating one film (that hasn't been released yet) because of superficial observations is the same sort of hyperbole that's persisted on the Internet for years.

 

[stufte]

The only similarity is that Sony produced both trailers (and they're comedies). The argument that the two projects look "similar" as a slight against Ghostbusters is superficial.

you really think it's superficial?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDLOO2SZdvY

And I don't know if Ghostbusters will be bad or not, but going off the trailers, I feel like it's definitely heading down the Pixels path.

 

[marrec]

The only similarity is that Sony produced both trailers (and they're comedies). The argument that the two projects look "similar" as a slight against Ghostbusters is superficial.

The tone is similar, the look of both movies, and the plotting feels similar.

Nobody has said "this movie will be as bad as Pixels"

People have said "this ad reminds me of the Pixels ad"

Nothing hyperbolic about that.

"Watch as this cast of four misfits in jumpsuits with guns take on an army of CG nostalgia inspired monsters in down-town big city while cracking flat jokes."

Again, though, this is just what it feels like from the Ads.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I'm certain that Ghostbusters won't be nearly as bad as Pixels, but they share the same vibe.

If the ghosts weren't so colorful, cartoony, and in-your-face, it would be a huge improvement IMO.

 

[DragonSworne]

The tone is similar, the look of both movies, and the plotting feels similar.

Nobody has said "this movie will be as bad as Pixels"

People have said "this ad reminds me of the Pixels ad"

Nothing hyperbolic about that.

"Watch as this cast of four misfits in jumpsuits with guns take on an army of CG nostalgia inspired monsters in down-town big city while cracking flat jokes."

Again, though, this is just what it feels like from the Ads.

People are giving it the benefit of the doubt though even though it is similar to Pixel.

 

[Sanjuro]

I quoted you again by accident. Sorry.



What's the point of arguing both films look "similar"?

This is how it breaks down: "Ghostbusters looks similar to Pixels, therefore Ghostbusters looks like a bad movie." That's a superficial argument and it doesn't mean anything. The trailer for Spy looked atrocious and it turned out to be good.

Arguing that one film is similar to another based entirely off the trailer is the same sort of logic used by people who thought Pacific Rim looked like Transformers based only on the trailers for Pacific Rim.

Denigrating one film (that hasn't been released yet) because of superficial observations is the same sort of hyperbole that's persisted on the Internet for years.

What are you talking about? Who suggested it is a bad movie?

 

[Booser]

Better trailer than the first, but still.........ugh. I do like some of the ghost designs though, even if they are still too "CG'y".

 

[Kinyou]

http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/18/the-soft-sexism-of-hating-on-the-new-ghostbusters

Would you look at that. Somebody else did it for me.

So basically that article strips James of any autonomy and just claims that only his unconscious sexism is speaking. Certainly a comfortable way to lead an argument.

 

[stufte]

People are giving it the benefit of the doubt though even though it is similar to Pixel.

I'll see Ghostbusters in the theater, I'm curious how it'll play out. My girls want to see it, they loved the originals (and liked Pixels. lol, kids). I would love to be wrong about how I feel about the look of this movie.

 

[marrec]

So basically that article strips James of any autonomy and just claims that only his unconscious sexism is speaking. Certainly a comfortable way to lead an argument.

I mean, it's Devin Faraci.

So...

 

[Corronchilejano]

People are giving it the benefit of the doubt though even though it is similar to Pixel.

Pixels "looked" fun, but it was an Adam Sandler movie.

Ghostbusters "looks" bad, but it's a Paul Feig movie.

 

[SJRB]

That was thoroughly unpleasant.

 

[Volimar]

You're all dead inside.

 

[MooMilk2929]

This one looks alright. It's rapidly being downvoted tho. I didn't really have a problem with either of the trailers tho.

 

[BamfMeat]

So basically that article strips James of any autonomy and just claims that only his unconscious sexism is speaking. Certainly a comfortable way to lead an argument.

Well, I mean, if the shoe fits.

 

[Delt31]

This is the trailer we should have gotten first. I hated the first trailer for it's horrible jokes, but this one was just fantastic.

Hype is definitely restoring!

you can't be serious right? This looks absolutely TERRIBLE. Crowd surfing and the lamest joke afterwards?

 

[Sanjuro]

You're all dead inside.

I had part of a slinky, but the Internet straightened it.

 

[Boudica]

The dislikes for these trailers are becoming comical. Some of the worst films ever released, didn't have their trailers down voted to this extent. In fact, it's hard to even find a movie trailer that has such a lopsided dislike vs like. New trailer looked fine :/

 

[Henkka]

Finally, Grace Randolph weighs in.

 

[B33]

you really think it's superficial?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDLOO2SZdvY

And I don't know if Ghostbusters will be bad or not, but going off the trailers, I feel like it's definitely heading down the Pixels path.

Yeah, it's superficial. That comparison feels exaggerated.

This sort of structure and methodology have been used in an array of film trailers. Preying on the nostalgia of the Ghostbusters versus 1980s arcade nostalgia are two different subjects for the same end (grab viewers based on nostalgia), but this isn't anything new.

Things like ending a trailer with a comedic beat is something that's been done in many movie trailers, not just trailers for comedies.

"Ghostbusters looks like Pixels" is endemic of movie trailers having a similar thought process put into them, but the content itself is dissimilar from Pixels beyond structural things that have been employed in trailers before and will continue to be used.

The tone is similar, the look of both movies, and the plotting feels similar.

Nobody has said "this movie will be as bad as Pixels"

People have said "this ad reminds me of the Pixels ad"

Nothing hyperbolic about that.

"Watch as this cast of four misfits in jumpsuits with guns take on an army of CG nostalgia inspired monsters in down-town big city while cracking flat jokes."

Again, though, this is just what it feels like from the Ads.

Why are people saying the two look similar? Just because they feel like it with no ulterior motive? Are you telling me they don't mean to imply or outright state that they think Ghostbusters will be of the same quality of Pixels because of how they look? Pixels isn't a revered movie so it's likely not meant as a compliment.

Trying to equate the two based entirely off the marketing of one and the marketing and final product of another is unfair and exaggerated. Their tone is similar? No kidding! They're both comedies.

So you're saying that the two look similar because the basic premise of Pixels is that a group of misfits must team up to stop a greater threat? Huh, it's almost like they got that from something else...

Oh.

 

[NipplesAndToes23]

Better than the last, but I still don't like it.

 

[Foggy]

Well, I mean, if the shoe fits.

Pop psychology isn't the best backbone of any argument.