People are too sensitive about gender and gender equality I would recommend CGI characterss without sex
This movie is quite sexist. No male ghostbuster. Male bimbo secretary. Vilifying men left and right (the mayor for example). Shooting the ghost in the balls. The penultimate ghost tech being the "nut cracker." The director accusing those who dislike the movie misogynist. Him stating that women are funnier than men. It just bashes and bashes like Brad Pitt on Jared Leto... Where is the equality? In the words of the true Himbo Justin Trudeau. "It is 2016"
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ghostbusters?src=hash">#Ghostbusters</a> heading for $70M-plus loss, sequel unlikely <a href="https://t.co/4b3BcOtQSt">https://t.co/4b3BcOtQSt</a> <a href="https://t.co/6aDwEeofqK">pic.twitter.com/6aDwEeofqK</a></p>— Hollywood Reporter (@THR) <a href="https://twitter.com/THR/status/763344206861574145">August 10, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The movie just was not that good. The more time goes by, the more i realize how forgettable it really was. It was ok at times but should have had a stronger script with a better villain. I am still amazed that it got such good reviews. Kate Mckinnon's character in the movie was one of the worst I have seen in a film in a while but you either love it or hate it. I get it.
movie industry accounting is always screwy. I suspect they'll make money on this or come close by the time it gets filtered through dvds (is that still a thing?) netflix, promo links etc. plus a revenue bump for the orig Ghostbusters. If $300m box office was the breakeven, they were way too ambitious. Not many films hit that. My somewhat educated guess is that the box office is disappointing, but not disastrous and that the actual net costs were lower and revenue will be higher than what's projected here. I thought the movie itself was OK for what it was. I've seen much worse sequels.
Watched it on a flight weekend before last. Had no problem with the casting direction or the decision to reboot. The movie simply wasn't funny, or interesting. Not least because it's been done before, I'm sure. I don't recommend paying to see it.
Their failure might lead to better movies in the future. When Hollywood attempts to force garbage down everyone's throat, they should fail.
Considering the developer of the game to go along with the movie filed for bankruptcy three days after it's release, the Ghostbusters license isn't really worth much. Your logic is kinda like local r****d jef rouner of the houston press: when he equated a movie that made 2.1 billion off a 245 million production budget to one that lost money. The ghostbusters license is a financial loser outside of possibly cartoons.
The people who made this didn't really want to and showed open contempt for the fans. The only way reboots stop happening is if people stop paying to see them.
Eff that... I still say live and let live. My life was not at all effected by the success or failure of this or any other film.
So we don't see any more female empowerment political reboots of classic movie franchises that I've loved since I was a kid. I don't mind political statement movies but don't leech on to great old films to do it.
Paul Feig got 10 million. melissa mcarthy got more than that probably double. I'm sure ernie hudson got at least 350 bucks. By fans I meant fans of the original movie. MM and paul fig made it for the $$$ but resented the fans.
