Ghostbusters 3: No Chicks Allowed

[Replies From View]

Also you can't escape the feeling that the scene/teaser was devised specifically to sell toys.

Even when you watched The Real Ghostbusters cartoon - which was essentially built around selling a toyline - you never felt such an obvious collection of rubbery action figures being presented one after the other.



AW THE ONE UNDER THE MELTING CHOCOLATE IS SO CUUUTE

AWWW LOOK AT THE TWO ON THE BARBECUE STICK XOXOXO



You can already taste them in the pages of the Argos catalogue.

[Replies From View]

To those saying maybe that scene will be better in the final movie; will it bollocks.  It's Sony Pictures.  The same studio that gave us the likes of Men In Black International.  I'm not cutting them any slack.  I slagged off the trailer for the 2016 remake of Ghostbusters when that dropped.  People said "it'll likely be better in the context of the actual finished movie. Give it a chance".  It wasn't.  It was as shit as the trailer suggested it would be.  Sony Pictures are the absolute pits.

I've just remembered that The Amazing Spider-Man 2 ended with the exact same dramatic moment that its trailer did.  Spider-Man about to whomp the Rhino with a manhole cover:  cut to black


oooh i wonder what that will lead to in the film.  nothing is the answer.  just the closing credits.

[Ian Benson]

To those saying maybe that scene from the clip will be better in the final movie; will it bollocks. 

It will certainly be edited as if it's for a movie and not for a clip though, such that the geography and flow of the scene will make more sense. For the people in the thread who have taken issue with the way that this clip is edited, that issue will be taken care of, so therefore it will be better in the final movie.

[St_Eddie]

Also you can't escape the feeling that the scene/teaser was devised specifically to sell toys.

Indeed and I know exactly why Sony Pictures released that clip; to try and cash-in on the Baby Yoda craze.  It's all just so damn cynically motivated.

It will certainly be edited as if it's for a movie and not for a clip though, such that the geography and flow of the scene will make more sense. For the people in the thread who have taken issue with the way that this clip is edited, then that issue will be taken care of, so therefore it will be better in the final movie.

Will there still be nostalgia baiting, computer generated Stay Puft Marshmellow Men though, doing cute things?  Will the cinematography still be flat and over-lit?  Unless they fix those aspects too, the scene will still be god awful.

[Mister Six]

Also you can't escape the feeling that the scene/teaser was devised specifically to sell toys.

Even when you watched The Real Ghostbusters cartoon - which was essentially built around selling a toyline - you never felt such an obvious collection of rubbery action figures being presented one after the other.



AW THE ONE UNDER THE MELTING CHOCOLATE IS SO CUUUTE

AWWW LOOK AT THE TWO ON THE BARBECUE STICK XOXOXO



You can already taste them in the pages of the Argos catalogue.

The scene would be funny if they were all torturing each other, like a cuter version of gremlins, instead of grinning constantly.

[St_Eddie]

Sorry, I'll stop posting in this thread for a bit.  Like most people, the lockdown has affected my mental state quite badly and I'm just getting overly angry at things.  I love cinema and I hate to see the absolute state of modern blockbusters but it's not good to get so worked up about it.  Sorry.

[Ian Benson]

Will there still be 'member berry computer generated Stay Puft Marshmellow Men though, doing cute things?  Will the cinematography still be flat and over-lit?  Unless they fix those aspects too, the scene will still be god awful.

But nobody was talking about any of that when saying that it would play differently in the finished movie.

You said:

To those saying maybe that scene from the clip will be better in the final movie; will it bollocks.

Nobody really said anything like this. People were merely pointing out to the people who weren't happy with the editing of the clip that the scene will be different in the finished movie in terms of cuts, pacing, etc.

[Replies From View]

The way he chuckles and reaches his finger out to the creepy little alien thing, rather than legging it away from there as fast as his legs will carry him, reminds me of a similar scene in Prometheus.

[St_Eddie]

Nobody really said anything like this. People were merely pointing out to the people who weren't happy with the editing of the clip that the scene will be different in the finished movie in terms of cuts, pacing, etc.

You're quite right.  Personally I have my doubts that the editing will be any different in the final movie but your point stands.

[Jerzy Bondov]

It really isn't that bad. It's like a scene from Gremlins or something.

[Replies From View]

It really isn't that bad. It's like a scene from Gremlins or something.

A hypothetical shit version of Gremlins


It's like if Gremlins and Pete Part II gave birth to a shit together

[Mister Six]

It really isn't that bad. It's like a scene from Gremlins or something.

Like I said, if the marshmallow victims were screaming or cackling manically it would have some of the energy of Gremlins. That they're all being cute and smiley just loses the edge and makes it look more like a shit kids' film trying to hawk toys.

[St_Eddie]

Like I said, if the marshmallow victims were screaming or cackling manically it would have some of the energy of Gremlins. That they're all being cute and smiley just loses the edge and makes it look more like a shit kids' film trying to hawk toys.

Agreed.

[Rizla]

That piece Avril posted is very good, and chimes with a lot of what Mr Plinkett had to say in his excellent review of the reboot . I'll add that being taken into Edinburgh to see it for my 9th birthday was one of the most exciting moments of my life up to that point - and the disappointment when it turned out my dickhead father had failed to book tickets in advance, meaning we instead were reduced to renting The Empire Strikes Back from the video shop[nb]Why didn't you see something else at the cinema? Well in those days cinemas only had two screens, and the other film showing was The Killing Fields, which, whilst sounding skill, was deemed to be unsuitable viewing for a child.[/nb], wounds me still. This film was a huge deal when it came out, make no mistake, in the same way that 1983 belonged to Return of the Jedi and 1985 was all about Back to the Future.

This new fiim will be fucking shit. Same as all the new Star Wars films. Just drivel with no redeeming features, and nothing whatsoever to get excited about, even if you're 9 years old.

[Replies From View]

Like I said, if the marshmallow victims were screaming or cackling manically it would have some of the energy of Gremlins. That they're all being cute and smiley just loses the edge and makes it look more like a shit kids' film trying to hawk toys.

They remind me too much of the Adipose in the 2008 series of Doctor Who, as well. 

[Replies From View]

I don't know why they couldn't have instead made a movie about that youtuber who strangely fixated on the "buttcrease" of his Real Ghostbusters Egon figure.


Fond memories of it, he said.  And he was pleased to see that it was present in the remake they did a few years back.

[popcorn]

You think this is basically a finished sequence from the film?

Yeah I do unfortunately.

Watching again I might be totally wrong about this. The sequence made just enough sense to me to strike me as poorly edited rather than a sort of compilation, but it makes less and less sense to me each time I watch it, to the point that I'm now thinking that surely this is just a very poorly considered edit job for promotional purposes as people are saying.

It's really very odd though, because I don't recall ever seeing a promotional clip from a film that has actually dramatically re-edited in such a way - not without being almost explicitly presented that way, with frames or fades between sequences, etc.

[Kelvin]

It really isn't that bad. It's like a scene from Gremlins or something.

Its not, though. Ghostbusters and Gremlins arent films that literally just mix monsters with comedy. There's an atmosphere, a light air of horror. Shots are lit and framed with intention and skill. They look seedy, or forboding, or striking.

As St Eddie has rightly pointed out, this scene - regardless of the final edit - is boringly shot, lit, and framed, with no atmosphere or tension - dramatic or comedic - whatsoever. That tension comes from more than editing, and it is abudently clear that its lacking from the direction.

The scene is only like Gremlins in the most superficial sense. But Gremlins isnt Gremlins just because a bunch of monsters do dumb shit. There's a gulf in effort and/or ability between the two.

[Replies From View]

Its not, though. Ghostbusters and Gremlins arent films that literally just mix monsters with comedy. There's an atmosphere, a light air of horror. Shots are lit and framed with intention and skill. They look seedy, or forboding, or striking.

To be fair though, the protagonist does ignore a woman screaming to not inconvenience his shopping.


So that makes the man seem like a terrible human being, which, along with the glibness of the way the sequence just moves on, creates an unpleasant atmosphere which makes you not want to watch the movie. 

Which I assume is all thoroughly intentional.

[St_Eddie]

So that makes the man seem like a terrible human being, which, along with the glibness of the way the sequence just moves on, creates an unpleasant atmosphere which makes you not want to watch the movie. 

Which I assume is all thoroughly intentional.

The filmmakers definitely intended for this to be shit.  It's all a part of the magic weave.

[Replies From View]

It's like a little dogwhistle isn't it, to the manchildren.


"Don't worry boys, this movie hates women!"



Atmosphere.

[popcorn]

To be fair though, the protagonist does ignore a woman screaming to not inconvenience his shopping.

That bit reminded me of Sean of the Dead when Sean fails to notice all the signs of apocalypse going on around him, except in Sean the joke is that he's just slow on the uptake / it isn't actually that different from normal suburban life, whereas in this the joke is I guess that the man is horrible. (Again, to be fair, it's out of context though.)

[Ian Benson]

As St Eddie has rightly pointed out, this scene - regardless of the final edit - is boringly shot, lit, and framed, with no atmosphere or tension - dramatic or comedic - whatsoever. That tension comes from more than editing, and it is abudently clear that its lacking from the direction.

Again, it's best to keep in mind that this is purely a clip for viral purposes to show off the mini puft guys. I would wager that beyond the edit being different in the finished product, the post-production will also be different such that it will look less like a overly-lit TV show or whatever. I don't personally have any issue with the framing of individual shots but I can see how some might, though to that end it's also worth pointing out that the film proper will be in a different aspect ratio to this clip, at least based on the actual trailers for the film (which in my opinion demonstrate a pretty strong - albeit faintly unoriginal - sense of atmosphere, tension, directorial-style, etc.). Put another way, if this scene goes in unchanged in terms of how it looks and feels, it absolutely will not be of a piece with the film as based on the trailers that have been released, which suggests that it has been released in this overly bright and simplistic, TV or tweet-friendly manner to merely point out the stay-puft fellas and very little else.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I can't say I've ever noticed a major difference in lighting and grading between trailers and the finished product. It could've happened but generally if a trailer of a film looks wank so does the finished product.

[Ian Benson]

I can't say I've ever noticed a major difference in lighting and grading between trailers and the finished product. It could've happened but generally if a trailer of a film looks wank so does the finished product.

Well there is a long history of it happening for trailers, but then this isn't even a trailer. It's a clip designed to go viral and look eye-catching on a phone. It's a step above a motion poster imo.

[popcorn]

I would wager that beyond the edit being different in the finished product, the post-production will also be different such that it will look less like a overly-lit TV show or whatever.

Now this is def not on the cards.

[Ian Benson]

Now this is def not on the cards.

I 100% think the clip has been optimised for this style of viral, phone-friendly advertising, as opposed to having to work in the context of the entire film. It looks like a commercial. The film, per the actual trailers, does not. We've established that they've changed the aspect ratio for this video, and that the edit is not how the scene will ultimately be presented in the final film, but shifting the brightness is a step too far?

[popcorn]

I look forward to the film being released so we can see who is right.

By the way... the loser...

will die.

[Ian Benson]

I look forward to the film being released so we can see who is right.

By the way... the loser...

will die.

Oh fuck that. I don't care about any of this. I was just bored. I WAS JUST BORED!

Fine. To the death it is.

[Replies From View]

Maybe Filmation could make a Ghostbusters film.