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 said:
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.

Hm... I guess you're right. I spoke too soon.



Around the Network
the_dark_lewd said:

This is one of those situations where you probably can't trust the reviewer score or the metacritic user score.

People who review movies for serious publications tend to be of a certain personality type.
People who reviewbomb stuff on metacritic tend to be of a certain personality type.

Neither of those will match up with the general population. The internet creates ideological silos that constantly distort facts and impressions.

Well said- It s too bad we prob need data analytics software these days to filter thru the various distortions - 

I hope today s kids become well versed in critical thinking-   I have used my own childrens reactions to yo tube videos etc as a learning point-  not telling them what to think (most of the time) just telling  to question before believing etc



IkePoR said:
Lawlight said:

lol @ believing reviewer scores. I recall when they gave Indiana Jones 4, It Follows and The Babadook good reviews.

The Babadook is the best horror movie made in the last 20 years.   

The Conjuring 1&2 are better. Insiduous as well.



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

Anytime any issue, movie, game, topic are put into the political arean in mass, results that may otherwise fall into typical norms will be tainted on virtually every level-  

For example, the basic message i have seen in many of the positive+/- reviews of Ghostbusters is:  well it doesn t suck as bad as,  or it doesn t suck as much as....

(kind of like th epeople who try to defend Mighty Number 9-  similar type reviews IMO)

and many of the less positive reviews seem to spend 1/3 to 1/2 of the revew apologising (so to speak) for their less than stellar review



Even though the movie looks like garbage to me, i have to say user eviews aren't at all trustworthy in this case. There was way too much hate floating around for this pre-release, and at least ha,f those reviewers probably didn't even watch the movie before giving it a 1.



Around the Network
Teeqoz said:
DonFerrari said:
And people calling others haters were completely incapable of explaining the necessity for the gender swap

Are we *still* on the gender swap thing? If it's a bad or good movie, then it's a bad or good movie. The fuck does the gender of the bloody cast have to do with it?

 

Was there a necessity for the original cast being the gender they were? No! Who the fuck gives a shit. This is a reboot. They have the creative freedom to have an all female ghostbusters team, without any "necessity" to it. If they had chosen an all male team, there wouldn't have been any "necessity" to that either. It's just a bloody gender choice lol. How people manage to make such a big deal out of this is baffling to me. Who the fuck cares?

Yes we are. Because if they want to have an all lead female or any other thing that doesn't ressemble the original one they have to have a good explanation for it, or just create their own movie from scratch. The way the movie is portrayed and defended by SJWs it's basically a "girls can too". So yes, it will be a point of concern every time a company decides to trash something they done in the past just to applease SJWs.

There were no reason for the original cast to be the way it was, and no one would complain if they have done a new movie with 10 fat chicks on a new idea. But they are just taking advantage of an existing movie to make a political agenda, even more when the director last movies were all female as well.

If no one cares ask yourself why they made it all female now and why there are so many defenders of the movie only because of it.

LurkerJ said:
DonFerrari said:

The best part is that you didn't even saw the movie so you don't even now if it's good kkkkk (I won't watch until it get on netflix so I also don't know if it's bad, but I say the premise of gender swap only for reasons is silly, and to me it's similar to Annita Kardeshians demands on gaming industries just to satisfy her ego and end up backfiring on the games sales)

I dunno why they swapped genders. I don't think it's a big deal who stars in this movie. The silly light-hearted story acts a medium to deliver jokes and comedy. It's not potraying historical events or anything serious. It's a reboot that's loosely based on the original. Gender swapping doesn't need explaining because when you reboot you are given the freedom to do it how you want.

I didn't see the movie, but I think the hate it receives from those, who also didn't see the moive, is ridiculous. And if all you can provide for reasoning is that the original GB had more male characters then just wow. This isn't a sequel...

Me not seeing the movie doesn't deny me the right to make remarks about the haters based on observations. 

Also, I think Anita, if she had any integrity, would oppose the movie because gender swapping is one of her issues with video games. But she is not actually a feminist and she is a lair who is only in for the money & controversy, so I expect her to say whatever floats her boat these days and whatever makes her (& women) look like victims. 

I'll say to you why they done it. To applease a vocal minority that asks for empowerement.

I'll repeat what I said above. They could just make whatever new movie they like with only females, have the previous two movies of the director been backlashed with anything because of the female cast? No. But you take an established franchise and start changing it and backlash is inevitable, I'm more suprise by people showing to be shocked and not understanding why there is backlash than to the backlash itself or the reasonings. That is a very good reason on why you don't retcom the past or ressucitate old things, because nostalgia is better left in the past than brought to the present.

Anita have an issue with gender swapping? Since when? From what I can see from her she would love to see Gears of War having bulky female with a cloak covering her body.

And most third wave feminists aren't much different then her. How many of the vocal (which get a lot of support before someone say they don't represent feminism) asks more of privileges than equal rights (guess what, in the western world woman already have more rigths than men). You will certainly see all those very distorted studies about paygap that completely ignore law to prevent different payment based on gender but want a university teacher to receive the same as a kindergarten one.



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."

User scores are never a way of coming to any conclusion.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

The movie sucks but a lot of the reviewers gave it a higher score because they didn't want to be labeled as misogynist. One of the few people that had enough balls to actually give it a honest review is Angry Joe he gave it a 2/10.



Trunkin said:

Even though the movie looks like garbage to me, i have to say user eviews aren't at all trustworthy in this case. There was way too much hate floating around for this pre-release, and at least ha,f those reviewers probably didn't even watch the movie before giving it a 1.

the great mistery is where is the balance between people who gave 1 just because of hate and how many gave 10 for SJW reason... we know both have a very big number of people under, but who have more?



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."

The movie is currently at 73% on RT, but if you look at the 20 "top critics" reviews, it's an even 50/50 split between fresh and rotten. The rest of the reviews are all no-name bloggers and websites trying to put a positive spin on the movie as best as they can because of their personal opinions / agenda.

It's funny because I guarantee you if this film starred guys like Adam Sandler or Kevin James with basically the same crappy dialogue, jokes and effects, it would be getting panned by the same reviewers and moviegoers claiming to love the all-female version. Most of the people claiming they love the new film and thought it was hilarious never saw or cared for the original either, which makes them all of a sudden caring about this film and franchise even more hilarious.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.