Mike_L said:
Huh? |
Look at the post you replied with "This is so fitting..."
| ClassicGamingWizz said: Mother of God , so they touched this holy franchise and rebooted it ? What a crime against humanity, they completely ruined the childhood of millions of boys damnit. What a fucking crime ,jail for them and the cast, electric chair for them all... OH I DONT NEED TO SEE IT? what do you mean i dont need to see it, why should i forget ? NOOOOO let me insult the cast and the director on twitter, that will show them all !!!! (people overreacting over something as unimportant as a movie that they can just ignore) |
|
foodfather said: (people overreacting over something as unimportant as a movie that they can just ignore) |
Aeolus451 said:
Look at the post you replied with "This is so fitting..." |
Yes, and?
You don't find it a tad overreacting?
when a director makes his life on doing gender based movies I'm not really interested in his affair... but may watch this movie one day.
But, yes, it's revisionism... if someone wants to create female heroes and all female movies they can, they don't need to redo movies for that, they can use something called creativity.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
torok said:
According to Metacritic, almost all 2016 Best Picture nominations are in the low 80s (http://www.metacritic.com/feature/2016-oscar-nominations-88th-academy-awards), which is pretty odd. I understand that a 80 for a movie and for a game on Meta are different. However, I don't think they should be. For games, we would say that a low 80s for an Uncharted/Halo/Gears would be disapointing. For a film, a low 80s can even run for best picture. It's quite a gap. |
That is just how much better games are than movies.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
| Mike_L said:
Yes, and? You don't find it a tad overreacting? |
To "Yes, and?", read my first post where I quoted you.
No, I don't. The supposed remake has more to do politics than it does as a remake of the first film. It wasn't intended as a faithful remake to make the fans happy.
Aeolus451 said:
To "Yes, and?", read my first post where I quoted you. No, I don't. The supposed remake has more to do politics than it does as a remake of the first film. It wasn't intended as a faithful remake to make the fans happy. |
Why do fans even care then and why are they surprised if it wasn't even intended as a faithful remake to make the fans happy?
Fei-Hung is a "huge Ghostbusters fan" and he's able to take the film for what it is: A different style of comedy that goes with what works for this specific cast. He'll watch it the same way he watched the original "with an open mind and not so seriously".
Mike_L said:
Why do fans even care then and why are they surprised if it wasn't even intended as a faithful remake to make the fans happy? Fei-Hung is a "huge Ghostbusters fan" and he's able to take the film for what it is: A different style of comedy that goes with what works for this specific cast. He'll watch it the same way he watched the original "with an open mind and not so seriously". |
Do you think that's awfully asinine to ask that? It's because they're fans of it and that's why they care. It has nothing to do with being open-minded versus being close-minded, rather its about not wanting something they're fans of to become a platform for gender politics.
Aeolus451 said:
Do you think that's awfully asinine to ask that? It's because they're fans of it and that's why they care. It has nothing to do with being open-minded versus being close-minded, rather its about not wanting something they're fans of to become a platform for gender politics. |
So what I'm getting is that some are outraged because they believe this movie's sole purpose is to be a platform for gender politics. If that's true I see why they don't want to see the movie, I guess. But just don't watch it then. If enough people ignore it a similar thing is less likely to happen again.
Though, I find it odd that many seem to be willing to give it a try when it releases on blu-ray and streaming services. If you're certain that it's nothing more than a platform for gender politics why would you even be interested in ever watching it? Because it actually may be more than just gender politics?
Some of you refuse to believe the reviewers even though they actually HAVE seen the movie and genuinely liked it.
I don't understand that but that's not a first. I'm often confused as to why some people seem to have a problem with everything.
No way will I be trusting people who spent months spreading FUD on people who didn't like what the movie was going for. Sony has been using a cynical campaign saying that if you don't like the movie then you hate women. Look at what happened to AVGN.
Mike_L said:
So what I'm getting is that some are outraged because they believe this movie's sole purpose is to be a platform for gender politics. If that's true I see why they don't want to see the movie, I guess. But just don't watch it then. If enough people ignore it a similar thing is less likely to happen again. Though, I find it odd that many seem to be willing to give it a try when it releases on blu-ray and streaming services. If you're certain that it's nothing more than a platform for gender politics why would you even be interested in ever watching it? Because it actually may be more than just gender politics?
Some of you refuse to believe the reviewers even though they actually HAVE seen the movie and genuinely liked it. I don't understand that but that's not a first. I'm often confused as to why some people seem to have a problem with everything. |
I don't think the reviewers are genuine. How would you know if they are.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
