By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Ghostbusters Meta critic user score 2.3

Wright on 16 July 2016
LurkerJ said:

I did say it did NOT matter to me what the gender was, even if the movie was completley based on the first game, which as it turned out, it wasn't.I thoguht it was before seeing it though, and I had no problems with "gender swapping".

I was NOT trying to be progressive. I was just ok with it. I am NOT being progressive now when I say it's ok for GB: the reboot to have an all female cast either.

 

I meant it as you choose a weird example to put, because there wasn't any gender swapping on the first Silent Hill movie, since it's not a movie of the first game.



Around the Network
LurkerJ on 16 July 2016
Wright said:
Psychotic said:

I disagree, I think it does work better with a mother.  It's more congruent with current gender roles as therefore require less suspension of disbelief.

 

So you're saying a father wouldn't go to the same lengths to protect his children like a mother would?

Yeah, that just doesn't add up.

A father can be as scared, as helpless, as clueless and as protecting... It works either way



Azuren on 16 July 2016
Psychotic said:
Azuren said:

 

1) And in this case there's a good reason for not liking it - becuase it's condescending. Countering it is as simple as saying "nu-uh", as it is baseless.

2) Your definition of progressive is not mine and not most people's.

3) And you use words like "you can't turn X into Y" etc. Obviously you can and it will generate a lot of publicity.

4) Not that anyone needs a reason, even less so one that you subjectively deem "legitimate", but "it's interesting" is reason enough.

5) And you are pointing it out using your own unbased assumptions and perhaps even some projection.

And finally, it is up to us to decide whether or not what you're doing is "attacking the movie". The only thing you have control over is how clearly you state your opinion.

1. So you just want to be "that guy". Enjoy.

 

2. Progressive from the time the original movies came out? Um, yes, yes it is. If it's something and old white Christian will disagree with, it's got a tinge progressive in it. 

 

3. Where are you even going with this? Did you even read any of this? 

 

4. Oh right, no. There's only a very vocal community of people hating the decision and asking why. But feel free to invalidate their existence as long as it furthers your own opinion. 

 

5. It's very simple psychology, dude.

 

And no, no it isn't. What you're describing it a misunderstanding, and it doesn't change the meaning of the message. Feel free to try again, though. 



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

LurkerJ on 16 July 2016
Wright said:
LurkerJ said:

I did say it did NOT matter to me what the gender was, even if the movie was completley based on the first game, which as it turned out, it wasn't.I thoguht it was before seeing it though, and I had no problems with "gender swapping".

I was NOT trying to be progressive. I was just ok with it. I am NOT being progressive now when I say it's ok for GB: the reboot to have an all female cast either.

 

I meant it as you choose a weird example to put, because there wasn't any gender swapping on the first Silent Hill movie, since it's not a movie of the first game.

Because I can't think of a better example. It just came to me when I was writing my reply.

Yes, there wasn't any gender swapping. But before seeing the movie and realizing it wasn't based on the first game, there was, and I didn't mind it



Psychotic on 16 July 2016
Wright said:
Psychotic said:

I disagree, I think it does work better with a mother.  It's more congruent with current gender roles as therefore require less suspension of disbelief.

 

So you're saying a father wouldn't go to the same lengths to protect his children like a mother would?

I'm saying mother is more likely to and our culture supports that.



Around the Network
Psychotic on 16 July 2016
Azuren said:
Psychotic said:

1) And in this case there's a good reason for not liking it - becuase it's condescending. Countering it is as simple as saying "nu-uh", as it is baseless.

2) Your definition of progressive is not mine and not most people's.

3) And you use words like "you can't turn X into Y" etc. Obviously you can and it will generate a lot of publicity.

4) Not that anyone needs a reason, even less so one that you subjectively deem "legitimate", but "it's interesting" is reason enough.

5) And you are pointing it out using your own unbased assumptions and perhaps even some projection.

And finally, it is up to us to decide whether or not what you're doing is "attacking the movie". The only thing you have control over is how clearly you state your opinion.

1. So you just want to be "that guy". Enjoy.

 

2. Progressive from the time the original movies came out? Um, yes, yes it is. If it's something and old white Christian will disagree with, it's got a tinge progressive in it. 

 

3. Where are you even going with this? Did you even read any of this? 

 

4. Oh right, no. There's only a very vocal community of people hating the decision and asking why. But feel free to invalidate their existence as long as it furthers your own opinion. 

 

5. It's very simple psychology, dude.

 

And no, no it isn't. What you're describing it a misunderstanding, and it doesn't change the meaning of the message. Feel free to try again, though. 

1) I'm okay with being "that guy", whatever that means.

2) Now you are being "that guy". Here's a story. How do you make it more progressive? Apply shoe polish on some of the characters' faces. For what reason? I don't know, it's just "more progressive" that way.

3) You said there was "no reason" for the gender filp. There's a reason.

4) I don't invalidate their existence, I invalidate their relevance.

5) Yup, a very simple error in human psychology.

I do not need to try again. The point stands. It doesn't matter what you think about yourself, it's up to others to judge your actions.



Wright on 16 July 2016
Psychotic said:

I'm saying mother is more likely to and our culture supports that.

 

What aspect of our culture supports that? If anything, our literature, cinematography and videogame culture highlights how capable a father is to protect his scion, and how great lenghts will he go to achieve that.



Barkley on 16 July 2016
LurkerJ said:

I don't like the movie. I haven't seen it. I am not on defense mode, I am find what's happening comical. That's all.

I'm in the same boat, haven't seen any ghost busters movie, just find it hillarious how many people that haven't seen the movie are saying reviewers are biased and liars and that the movie is terrible. xD

But yeah everyone decided it was going to be terrible after seeing the trailer anyway. Even if the movie was good and even if they went to see it, it'd be harder for them to come away liking the movie then if they'd never seen a trailer at all, because they're already expecting it to be bad, so they'll probably come out of it thinking it was bad.



Metallox on 16 July 2016

You never trust the Metacritic user score, even less in this case. I thought that was plain obvious.



My bet with The_Liquid_Laser: I think the Switch won't surpass the PS2 as the best selling system of all time. If it does, I'll play a game of a list that The_Liquid_Laser will provide, I will have to play it for 50 hours or complete it, whatever comes first. 

Dyllyo on 16 July 2016

Yeah, I don't really pay attention to user scores. And no one really should.