You’re the one being dismissive here not me. And I’m not @anon61221983, I know, its easy to confuse us, we’re both chicks and both have names starting with M (and we do tend to agree) but we are different people, I promise.
You don’t like the movie. Cool. Don’t go see it. /done
Thank you!
At a guess, the hump (?) of votes at 7 and 8 is probably where the authentic majority would be rating it. Many more people voted for those than for 9 or 6 or anything else (excluding the outliers at 1 and 10).
Can’t wait to see it for myself, hopefully with the SO!
Well, if I run into anyone who dismissed misogyny out of hand, I’ll let you know.
Sometimes the human brain misfires. Your names are pixels on the screen and yes, you do tend to lean hard on the dismissive GIFs.
Seriously, go back and watch that video. The overall message is this: look, if you’re saying you like this one particular movie not because you really liked it, but because you’re counteracting the trolley dudes and you’re pushing for more female leads, you’re doing the job of the Sony marketing department, because they latched on to online misogyny as a marketing tool. That’s it. That’s all. Amazing that it’s working, but it is.
Well, I think the video posted by @strawboss totally did that. it completely flattens how films actually get made as some sort of corporate cabal and equated feminism with misogyny. She called it “false flag feminism” rather than actually admit that misogyny on the internet is a major problem. I mean, the person your most defending here as being stereotyped by the film Leslie Jones has been dealing with endless racism and sexism aimed at her on twitter because of this film. Do you honestly think that’s not a problem and she just needs to wave it away?
Look, you don’t like the film and the culture of remakes, I think that’s a fine criticism, but why do you need to assume that women who do like the film and are happy to have 4 women starring in it are just being duped by corporations into consuming their products? Do you really think so little of us and that we can’t think and reason for ourselves?
… but I’m not saying that.
I want to see the movie because it looks good to me. I don’t care about reboots, I’ve liked Star Trek and the new Star Wars, hell even the new Spiderman and Batman/Superman/etc are all good in my books. Judge Dredd was awesome! And I can’t wait for more!
For me… I’d likely have gone seen this movie even if there hadn’t been a man-baby backlash because whatever, I like big-shiny-explodey popcorn movies. Hell I’m going to see it in IMAX 3D!
All the male tears are just a delicious icing on an already delicious ghostbusters cake!
AND the women aren’t sexualized? AND AND its gonna piss some neckbeards off? SIGN ME UP!
(Also, neither I nor @anon61221983 are @Daedalus, whose totes cool btw, but that reply button is playing you for a fool.)
I think you need to tone it down!
I was going to flag you, but you aren’t directly attacking the other members - just being rude and unpleasant and offending my delicate sensibilities.
You have a right to your feelings, but if a movie you’ve never seen (and don’t intend to see) is making you angry you might want to examine your motivations.
The movie hasn’t injured you (because you dodged that bullet when you saw the “sassy loud black woman”), so who are you concerned for?
At this point, I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree, because I’m reading your review and asking myself, “Did we watch the same video?” Because no, when she talked about “false flag feminism”, she’d talked about how people like Richard Roeper was hit with a shitstorm of shitty comments about how he was a shitty misogynist because he didn’t like Ghostbusters.
How does the word “if” work? If you genuinely like it, that’s great. You do you. Me, I loved the latest Star Wars even though people complained about Rey, and I loved the last two Star Trek movies despite people claming that J. J. Abrams ruined the entirety of Star Trek. They’re entitled to their opinions; I’m entitled to mine; you’re entitled to yours. I was responding to a specific comment and you’re trying to twist my words into something they’re not, and specifically trying to twist them into me saying that I think women can’t think for themselves(!) so I think we’re done here.
I don’t even remember the “Twinkie” conversation, so I guess I didn’t find it amusing either.
Such things I suppose strike a balance between tone and content. What I liked about the 1984 Ghostbusters was its dry sarcasm, and playing everything mostly straight. This emphasizes the wit behind the writing. It’s also largely where they lost me with Ghostbusters II, which did IIRC have some interesting ideas lurking in there. The 2016 movie reminds me of other contemporary media which frame the exchanges as all being somehow wacky, which IMO comes off as forced and desperate for laffs. Being signalled that I am watching “funny” grates for me, and is the same reason why I loathe laugh tracks. That is not to say that the content won’t be funny or otherwise good on its own terms, but it feels manipulative and is a turn-off I need to actively work to overcome.
Of all movie genres, I think that horror and comedy suffer most from audience expectations. The labels seem to function for many people like a drug, a button which is pushed to make you feel a certain way. I think that “supposed” is the enemy of good stories and good criticism, and that media are best approached with minimal prior expectations. Reviews along the lines of “I wasn’t scared even once” or “I didn’t laugh even once” are people living entirely in their expectations, rather than truly seeing what is being presented. Other genres do not suffer from this to anywhere near the same extent. Some of the strongest negative reactions seem to come from getting horror and comedy wires crossed with each other. Whereas comedy/horror hybrids seem to focus more upon the comedy expectations.
Speaking of critique, and bring this more on-topic, I think that “ranking” is generally a bad idea. There is hardly any way to consistently map a nuanced critique into a quantified number. These rating aggregators I think function more to discourage well thought-out critique in favor of kneejerk consumer reactions which ultimately amount to a buy/don’t buy decision, which I think is entirely uninteresting. Voting on whether or not some art “is good” is a meaningless exercise at best, and deceptive at worst. When people actually discuss what they do or don’t like about media, then we have something to work with.
I would think Mal’s noble defence of Leslie would be well served by investigating her feelings about the role.
The first Google result clearly shows that Jones is happy about the character she plays, and argues against that criticism. That doesn’t mean it can’t be legitimately seen as racist, but I’ll take her word perspective over a bunch of white dudes on the internet.
You sure about that? Because you seem rather intent on telling us our opinions are invalid…
It was this scene, which is pretty minor, but nicely encapsulates everyone’s personality while they’re just sitting around and talking like normal people. Egon’s the scholar, Ray busts into his paranormal-babble, Winston’s the everyday guy, and Venkman is, well, Bill Murray.
So… The Long Kiss Goodnight?
Just remember, you’re being used to sell a product.
Responding to you cuz apparently its the cool thing to do. 
Also, this:
= awesome.
That’s not relevant if we actually enjoy the movie!
What’s confusing about this?
Well, it’s working in part…but clearly not well enough to overcome the misogyny.
Look at the numbers, males and negatives are statistically dominating the females and positives by over 20%, and then you have to take the overall positive review into account and factor it in with the skewed total in some manner (I’d start by creating a weighting factor and ramping against the 1s and 10s myself).
No matter how you hit the numbers, misogyny (or other males voting ‘1’ without having seen the movie) is the dominant factor here.
Or - one could simply dismiss the rankings as having no real statistical merit. The practice of “voting” only works if all participants agree upon what they are voting for. Two hours of time filled? A well-crafted media artifact? An ideological position? A personal insecurity? Even without controversy, such rankings/ratings are already not helpful, and the controversy only makes it less so.
I acknowledge that the underlying misogyny has been and is a problem. But I don’t think that “It makes a useless statistic even more useless” makes much difference.
n…no I wasn’t manipulated… I er…really liked it…
Yeah, I really liked it and I was there.
Your blatant ad hominem attack doesn’t hold up to scrutiny or statistical evidence. My days of being unimpressed by your ability to argue your case on it’s merits are coming to a middle.
