|
The_Doctor posted:Does the pole still work? ... in fairness I have never asked. I haven't been there in a few years, though, so someone more local might be better able to answer than myself.
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 14:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Does the pole still work? This place is great! When can we move in? You gotta try this pole!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
Alan_Shore posted:You gotta try this pole! Name of Ray’s sex tape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 21:07
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Name of Ray’s sex tape. Cabin In The Woods.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
One of my favorite differences between GB1 and GB2016 is the treatment of the Ghostbusters' dismissal from their university positions. In the original, the dean is kind of a uptight prick like Walter Peck, but he's completely right to kick their goldbricking, student-pursuing asses out of the school, and calls Venkman out on being a professional con artist. It works comedically because it's obvious they're just loving around and not really qualified to be there, and feeds into their status as a bunch of goofballs. The irony operates on the fact that, in any sane universe, Dean Yeager and Walter Peck would be completely correct and justified in their actions, they just happen to be unlucky enough to live in one where ghosts exist. In GB2016, Kristen Wiig's character is coded as being a competent academic, so when she meets with Dean Middle Finger over the Youtube video, it's treated as some sort of grand injustice. Why can't this kooky character see how competent and right she is? It completely inverts the structure: everyone surrounding the Ghostbusters is some kind of moron or buffoon, which puts our main four in a positive light but saps the irony out of the film and puts them essentially in the role of the straight man. In GB2016, the universe unjustly punishes the Ghostbusters until they win. In GB1, the universe unjustly punishes everyone else, and that's why it's funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 14:48
|
|
|
Not only that, but when Venkman is chewed out by the Dean, it's the only time he doesn't have a come back. Just a deadpan "I see."
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:It's basically watching an A grade comedy cast wrestle with a C grade script. It's not terrible, but there are long stretches where it seems like the writers forgot to even try to be funny, and the actors are just trying to power through dialogue that's just sort of there. Nothing is scary even on the level of the librarian ghost scene, nothing is really threatening and nothing seems to matter very much. By the end of the movie the heroes have saved the day, but the characters themselves don't seem that happy about it. I wanted to like it but really struggled to maintain interest. This is the most reasonably accurate thing I've read on it. Tonally, the humour was all over the place (a bit like GB2). The "Jaws Mayor" joke stitched me up, but that and the "xxx sr has been dead for 50 years" joke gag feel pulled from a Zucker movie rather than the movie you're actually watching. Alan_Shore posted:Not only that, but when Venkman is chewed out by the Dean, it's the only time he doesn't have a come back. Just a deadpan "I see." Dean Yeager's turn around and smile move is one of the finest bits of physical comedy in cinema.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:05
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Dean Yeager's turn around and smile move is one of the finest bits of physical comedy in cinema. It completely demonstrates the difference between the movies. It's small, subtle, and 100 times funnier than some Mad TV clown doing the inflate your middle finger like a balloon gag. Alan_Shore posted:Not only that, but when Venkman is chewed out by the Dean, it's the only time he doesn't have a come back. Just a deadpan "I see." Yeah, it's great. He just completely cops to it. No indignation about how misunderstood and competent he is. Just recognition that his con's run its course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:In GB2016, the universe unjustly punishes the Ghostbusters until they win. In GB1, the universe unjustly punishes everyone else, and that's why it's funny. This is a good observation, but I think the GB2016 approach could have been decent if the ending felt like a big win. Beating up your heroes until they triumph over adversity is a classic crowd-pleaser, but the audience really needs to feel like finally winning was a big deal emotionally for the characters. In GB1 it basically ends with big cheering crowds and  I LOVE THIS TOWN while GB2016 ends with them just sitting around a table in a bar with  faces on going, "That was pretty good, right?"
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
GB2016's moment of... triumph?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
The stakes just aren't there, a ton of effort went into selling the audience on Gozer as a serious world-ending threat, and the remake has none of that. Like, what is there in GB '16 for an 8 year old to be scared of? It's just goofy on goofy on goofy with nothing to mix it up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 16:56
|
|
|
echoplex posted:Dean Yeager's turn around and smile move is one of the finest bits of physical comedy in cinema. It's really great. GB1 is full of tiny wonderful moments you can miss in 50 viewings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_vHbFQRT3Y Also, I just found this extended/deleted cut of the scene that I can't recall having ever seen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtslDRp4bT8
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Aaaand, now I want to watch Ghostbusters again. Is there more than one Blu-ray, and if so, which one is the best one?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
The 4K Blu-ray apparently has a really good transfer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:Aaaand, now I want to watch Ghostbusters again. Is there more than one Blu-ray, and if so, which one is the best one? https://www.amazon.com/Ghostbusters...busters+blu+ray This set is the newest transfer based on a 4k master so it's probably as perfect as the film will ever look. It's cheap now because a UHD version came out recently but the reviews seem to indicate that it's barely an upgrade on the current blu ray just because of how excellent that transfer was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
Kinda makes me wonder if the core issue with GB2016 (one of them anyway) is that it's so focused on being A Comedy Movie, they have have comedy plot, comedy stakes, the plot is an excuse for comedy to happen, while as mentioned the original movie doesn't give a poo poo about genre. A big issue with modern filmmaking I think is that it's obsessed with sticking to what's expected of its genre (an already vague, artificial and often unhelpful term) giving movies no room to stretch or explore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
GB2016 is also a comedy movie that doesn’t really have very many constructed jokes. It’s so improv heavy that there isn’t much in the way of a focused punchline, but rather an unending assault of almost-punchlines. It’s the practice of “one of these has to work, right?” And it doesn’t. Like my single favorite gag in the original Ghostbusters is when they power on the proton packs in the elevator for the first time. You have the set-up of Ray’s “thermonuclear reactor strapped to our backs” dialogue, and the pay-off is dual layered; Egon and Peter crowding to the back corner, and Ray remaining blissfully ignorant of them doing so. It’s awesome because it’s a character focused bit: Egon is a mad scientist and Peter is a cynic. They actually believe it might blow up. Meanwhile, Ray is the naive believer. Good comedy is character work expressed through jokes. Bad comedy is a series of jokes trying to give the impression of an actual character.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Kinda makes me wonder if the core issue with GB2016 (one of them anyway) is that it's so focused on being A Comedy Movie, they have have comedy plot, comedy stakes, the plot is an excuse for comedy to happen, while as mentioned the original movie doesn't give a poo poo about genre. A big issue with modern filmmaking I think is that it's obsessed with sticking to what's expected of its genre (an already vague, artificial and often unhelpful term) giving movies no room to stretch or explore. I'd say this is a big part of it, or at least Feig misunderstanding where comedy comes from in a movie. The supporting cast in the original is pretty straight-laced, the closest thing to a wacky character is Louis, and he's largely kind of your standard 80's dweeboid. Venkman's ostensible romantic rival is the nasal-spray-using violinist who's coded as being a stuck-up wet blanket type. There's very few people making "joke jokes" outside of Venkman. The lines you remember from Egon are him being socially oblivious and somewhat disconnected from reality. Contrast this with GB2016, where it's like every person in New York just took the intro course at the UCB. Our main four are just constantly making references and quips, and the writing's afraid to make anything even harmlessly at their own expense. All the supporting characters outside of the Game of Thrones guy are just constantly riffing. It's constant noise, and leaves you without that central lens character to attach to. Fart City posted:GB2016 is also a comedy movie that doesn’t really have very many constructed jokes. It’s so improv heavy that there isn’t much in the way of a focused punchline, but rather an unending assault of almost-punchlines. It’s the practice of “one of these has to work, right?” And it doesn’t. Put about as well as you can, 100% Squashing Machine fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Aug 7, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:I'd say this is a big part of it, or at least Feig misunderstanding where comedy comes from in a movie. The supporting cast in the original is pretty straight-laced, the closest thing to a wacky character is Louis, and he's largely kind of your standard 80's dweeboid. Venkman's ostensible romantic rival is the nasal-spray-using violinist who's coded as being a stuck-up wet blanket type. There's very few people making "joke jokes" outside of Venkman. The lines you remember from Egon are him being socially oblivious and somewhat disconnected from reality. Contrast this with GB2016, where it's like every person in New York just took the intro course at the UCB. Our main four are just constantly making references and quips, and the writing's afraid to make anything even harmlessly at their own expense. All the supporting characters outside of the Game of Thrones guy are just constantly riffing. It's constant noise, and leaves you without that central lens character to attach to. Even Louis though, his dialogue is not funny in the way that Feig's comedy is funny, even when it works. It's a deeper kind of funny that depends heavily on Moranis' performance and it's rooted in character, not any traditional set-up/punchline structure. Think about the genius of this scene and how it's just completely the opposite of the kind of comedy that GB'16 was going for: Woman at Party : [coming up to Louis during party] Do you have any Excedrin or extra-strength Tylenol? Louis : [opening cabinet] Gee, I think all I got is acetylsalicylic acid, generic. See, I can get six hundred tablets of that for the same price as three hundred of a name brand. That makes good financial sense, good advice... [takes platter back into living room] Louis : Hey, this is real smoked salmon from Nova Scotia, Canada, $24.95 a pound! It only cost me $14.12 after tax, though. [walks up to a hapless guest, speaking confidentially] Louis : I'm givin' this whole thing as a promotional expense, that's why I invited clients instead of friends. You havin' a good time, Mark? [heads across the room, greeting other guests] Louis : How you doing? Why don't you have some of the brie, it's at room temperature! [to the Tall Woman] Louis : You think it's too warm in here for the brie? Tall Woman at Party : [standing] Louis, I'm going home. Louis : Aw, don't leave yet. Well, listen, maybe if we start dancing other people will join in! Tall Woman at Party : [pauses] Okay! [Louis and the Tall Woman begin disco dancing. Suddenly the doorbell rings] Louis : Oh, don't move, I just gotta get the door. [opens door, greeting guests] Louis : Ted! Annette! I'm glad you could come, how you doin', give me your coats. Everybody, this is Ted and Annette Fleming! Ted has a small carpet cleaning business in receivership; Annette's drawing a salary from a deferred bonus from two years ago! They got fifteen thousand left on the house at eight percent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Even Louis though, his dialogue is not funny in the way that Feig's comedy is funny, even when it works. It's a deeper kind of funny that depends heavily on Moranis' performance and it's rooted in character, not any traditional set-up/punchline structure. Right, there's that difference that Louis isn't aware that what he's saying is supposed to be funny. Everything he says drips with sincerity. He's clueless, but not stupid, if that distinction makes sense. GB2016 is chock-full of stupid people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
Fart City posted:Like my single favorite gag in the original Ghostbusters is when they power on the proton packs in the elevator for the first time. You have the set-up of Ray’s “thermonuclear reactor strapped to our backs” dialogue, and the pay-off is dual layered; Egon and Peter crowding to the back corner, and Ray remaining blissfully ignorant of them doing so. It’s awesome because it’s a character focused bit: Egon is a mad scientist and Peter is a cynic. They actually believe it might blow up. Meanwhile, Ray is the naive believer. The rest of the scene immediately after that is also jam packed with characterization. When they step out of the elevator Ray and Egon are swinging their proton wands around like they're a SWAT team but Peter just ambles out without even turning his pack on, etc etc.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJVgfDnjkko Note that they also included the step-away-from-the-unlicenced-nuclear-accelerator gag in the equivalent scene in GB2016: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoSzqHlvN6s&t=83s ... but just in case you missed it, they do they stepping-back-from-the-untested-equipment gag again later on, and one of the characters even announces they're doing it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lw7GJh31nM
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
It also contrasts with the "what the hell are you doing?" lady and the three's sort of embarrassed apology. That's funny. You almost killed someone because you're a bunch of overgrown kids and your response is completely inadequate. In GB2016, she would've been screaming and running around and the proton beam would've chased her around the corridor, and the entire time Wiig and McCarthy would be shouting TURN IT OFF!!! WHO TAUGHT YOU HOW TO SHOOT, ALEXANDER HAMILTON????
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Note that they also included the step-away-from-the-unlicenced-nuclear-accelerator gag in the equivalent scene in GB2016: I don't like this 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
God drat, I just remembered the incredibly unfunny wonton soup running gag. GB2016 is like a junkyard full of roaming stray jokes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
The awkward stretches of improv that don't really work also end up making the movie feel a lot longer than it is. I checked the clock thinking "are we in the home stretch here yet?" and the movie wasn't even half over.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:It also contrasts with the "what the hell are you doing?" lady and the three's sort of embarrassed apology. That's funny. You almost killed someone because you're a bunch of overgrown kids and your response is completely inadequate. In GB2016, she would've been screaming and running around and the proton beam would've chased her around the corridor, and the entire time Wiig and McCarthy would be shouting TURN IT OFF!!! WHO TAUGHT YOU HOW TO SHOOT, ALEXANDER HAMILTON???? Also compare Peter's sarcastic "Successful test!" quip and Ray's oblivious "I guess so" response to the reactions in GB'16. It's really weird picking individual gags from GB'84 and seeing whether they repeat them in GB'16 and how often. They had another untested-equipment-let's-hope-it-doesn't-kill-us scene earlier in the film and they reeeeally laboured the "Oops, hope you don't die" aspect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl4bRwYs1tI They also repeat the "He slimed me!" gag which they'd already done earlier in the film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
To me, you can tell all you need to about each film by comparing and contrasting the openings of both. GB2016 is this long drawn out scene of bad improv and pratfalls while the movie trips over itself at the starting line to yell SEE?!!? IT’S A COMEDY. GET IT? GB’84 at least has the confidence to let itself be spooky and atmospheric, things that the reboot not only lacks, but seems utterly uninterested in attempting - despite it being a necessary core component of the franchise’s DNA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:18
|
|
|
Squashing Machine posted:It also contrasts with the "what the hell are you doing?" lady and the three's sort of embarrassed apology. That's funny. You almost killed someone because you're a bunch of overgrown kids and your response is completely inadequate. In GB2016, she would've been screaming and running around and the proton beam would've chased her around the corridor, and the entire time Wiig and McCarthy would be shouting TURN IT OFF!!! WHO TAUGHT YOU HOW TO SHOOT, ALEXANDER HAMILTON???? The original Ghostbusters almost kill that maid in the hotel and apologize profusely. Kristen Wiig straight up murders Bill Murray's character and it's played for laughs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
The tone of GB2016 honestly makes more sense if you view it as a live action reboot of The Real Ghostbusters, rather than the 1984 film. If carries about the same stakes and consequences as a Saturday morning cartoon, while eschewing nearly any real horror elements. But the again TRGB had The Bogeyman, which was a lot more impactful than anything in GB2016, so it even fails at that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:27
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:The original Ghostbusters almost kill that maid in the hotel and apologize profusely. Kristen Wiig straight up murders Bill Murray's character and it's played for laughs. It's funny, I'd describe the original as a darker film, tone-wise, but no one dies. The worst thing that can happen is you get turned into a dog or have 500 gallons of marshmallow fluff dropped on your head. Though that fluff must've been pretty hot, maybe Peck died. Anyway, yeah, the new Ghostbusters kill one guy and watch another die without any real reaction on their part, they're pretty much sociopaths.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:29
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Also compare Peter's sarcastic "Successful test!" quip and Ray's oblivious "I guess so" response to the reactions in GB'16. Really the only thing that worked for me in that entire scene was the "do you know your iron level" line, even Wiig's response didn't work. Watching these clips, it's like there's a lot of little things that could work, but fall 100% flat because they're not playing it straight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Fart City posted:The tone of GB2016 honestly makes more sense if you view it as a live action reboot of The Real Ghostbusters, rather than the 1984 film. If carries about the same stakes and consequences as a Saturday morning cartoon, while eschewing nearly any real horror elements. poo poo, that episode where Slimer ran away and nearly got absorbed into a giant ghost gave me nightmares.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
It sounds like they're reading the scene directions instead of their lines. They're just narrating everything that's already happening visually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
The only good joke in GB2016 is Hemsworth’s saxophone headshots, and that’s because it had to be set up and staged.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 19:47
|
|
|
Fart City posted:The tone of GB2016 honestly makes more sense if you view it as a live action reboot of The Real Ghostbusters, rather than the 1984 film. Yeah but closer to the later seasons when Dave Coulier was voicing Venkman
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
Fart City posted:The tone of GB2016 honestly makes more sense if you view it as a live action reboot of The Real Ghostbusters, rather than the 1984 film. If carries about the same stakes and consequences as a Saturday morning cartoon, while eschewing nearly any real horror elements. No GB2016 joke is as good as this IMO: Peter: Anything that looks like Godzilla wearing an octopus hat shouldn't be hard to find. Squashing Machine posted:It sounds like they're reading the scene directions instead of their lines. They're just narrating everything that's already happening visually. Sarcastically, I'm in charge.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
OctoberCountry posted:Yeah but closer to the later seasons when Dave Coulier was voicing Venkman Complaining about cartoons is Peak Goon, I know, but the jump from Lorenzo Music's deadpan to Coulier just doing 75% Carl from "Caddyshack" was jarring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 21:27
|
|
|
Liberal Idiot posted:Complaining about cartoons is Peak Goon, I know, but the jump from Lorenzo Music's deadpan to Coulier just doing 75% Carl from "Caddyshack" was jarring. It wouldn't have been bad if it wasn't right when the overall writing went from decent/pretty good for an 80s kids show to terrible/par for most 80s kids shows.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Fart City posted:The tone of GB2016 honestly makes more sense if you view it as a live action reboot of The Real Ghostbusters   Hmm, yep.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2018 02:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
The first few seasons of The Real Ghostbusters did have some very spooky moments though. The Boogeyman and Samhain didn't seem so goofy to me when I was a kid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2018 02:12
|
|