Sorry, I came off a bit vague, let me try that again.
Looking back, we as society are gonna have to live with the fact that this movie was
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Mr Plinkett reviews Ghostbusters (2016)
- Thread starter jack_package_200
- Start date
Sorry, I came off a bit vague, let me try that again.
Looking back, we as society are gonna have to live with the fact that this movie was
chrisPjelly
Member
Review seems alright so far. Nothing controversial, so I'm sure there won't be a shit storm like the other thread. Still a pretty pointless review, considering that they're just elaborating on points that THEY themselves beat to death with the HITB review. Again, most of the focus in the studio and soulless production. Not that I don't agree, but I feel like this is something that Mike was supposed to release last year and put off for whatever reason.
Fantastic on point review, so glad it was just a relatively filler-less critique of the film. Really highlights how utterly insufferable it is between the saturated colour balance, needlessly verbose delivery, gaudy product placement and complete lack of likeable characters. Depressing ending though, damn 
Ha, great way of phrasing it. His masterful use of behind the scenes footage never fails to impress.
EDIT: Also, if you liked this I highly recommend checking out their GB2 commentary. It was recorded after Harold Ramis' death and before the reboot was properly announced, but still has some fascinating Plinkett-esque insight into the series along with a bunch of funny moments.
https://redlettermedia.bandcamp.com/track/ghostbusters-2-half-in-the-bag-commentary-track
Ha, great way of phrasing it. His masterful use of behind the scenes footage never fails to impress.
EDIT: Also, if you liked this I highly recommend checking out their GB2 commentary. It was recorded after Harold Ramis' death and before the reboot was properly announced, but still has some fascinating Plinkett-esque insight into the series along with a bunch of funny moments.
https://redlettermedia.bandcamp.com/track/ghostbusters-2-half-in-the-bag-commentary-track
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
I really have no problem with Feig. Not a big fan of his movies, but I think they're perfectly fine. Just not my thing. Why the fuck he was the person given Ghostbusters is the part I don't get. He was just absolutely the wrong man for the job, as is clear now in hindsight. It was Sony just looking at how well his movies do at the box office, and not caring if his style fit with what people expect out of Ghosbuters or not.
True enough about the comment on the possible lesbian love-interest bit.
But even so, they haven't before shied away from discussing external factors beyond a movie before. The prequel reviews have tons of that kind of criticism, and even recently with Wonder Woman, they mentioned the praise the character was getting for being a female role model. They then proceeded to say how weird that was when girls have real-world role models which... kind of misses the point? And totally does come off as some sheltered white dude shit.
Either way, this review is atleast a positive mark on their record. Hopefully it's a sign they're being atleast a bit more thoughtful about their criticism going forward.
It's also a riff on capitalism, corruption, and fame.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
You people don't know what it's like working in the private sector. They expect results.
Gentleman Jack
Member
That was better than the TFA plinkett review.
I maintain that the Plinkett persona should die, because it represents a backslide of the Mike/Jay back and forth that has been the core appeal of RLM for the last six years. Plinkett is just Mike slurring into a microphone for 60-90 minutes, and is much, much less funny than the banter we get when Mike and Jay are in an earnest discussion about a movie.
It definitely looks like Sony wasn't done with the fuckery for the blu ray release either, I don't remember the theatrical version doing that 'shove things out of the top and bottom of the frame for a fake 3D effect that appears again and again in the footage used in the review.
The film definitely lacked side characters for the audience (and the characters) to care about. I don't agree that they needed a romantic interest to drive it forward, but just one of them having, for example, a family member, or a sympathetic coworker that isn't just a joke (Kevin) would have done wonders in humanizing the film and giving us something to root for besides 'they're the good guys because we say so.'
I maintain that the Plinkett persona should die, because it represents a backslide of the Mike/Jay back and forth that has been the core appeal of RLM for the last six years. Plinkett is just Mike slurring into a microphone for 60-90 minutes, and is much, much less funny than the banter we get when Mike and Jay are in an earnest discussion about a movie.
It definitely looks like Sony wasn't done with the fuckery for the blu ray release either, I don't remember the theatrical version doing that 'shove things out of the top and bottom of the frame for a fake 3D effect that appears again and again in the footage used in the review.
Blech
The film definitely lacked side characters for the audience (and the characters) to care about. I don't agree that they needed a romantic interest to drive it forward, but just one of them having, for example, a family member, or a sympathetic coworker that isn't just a joke (Kevin) would have done wonders in humanizing the film and giving us something to root for besides 'they're the good guys because we say so.'
Frozenprince
Banned
Which is why I always felt they either needed to completely revamp the tone of the series while keeping the spirit (dorky scientists fight extranormal threat with science and humor) or set it in Detroit or Chicago or something.
Beerman462
Member
Shit like this was why the first Ghostbusters was good.
At first I was like. Kinda hot.
Then I was like. Fuck that's scary.
At first I was like. Kinda hot.
Then I was like. Fuck that's scary.
TheTylerDurden
Member
It didn't make ANY sense to me at all to make it a remake. It would have been so much better to make it a true sequel.
And sure, why not set it in another major city? That would have been a great idea.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Shit like this was why the first Ghostbusters was good.
At first I was like. Kinda hot.
Then I was like. Fuck that's scary.
It's always interesting we have the big baddie finally revealed at the end and she disappears in literally minutes.
Gentleman Jack
Member
I won't lie, that was my first clear look at the Gozer scene in the original film. Until that scene shows up in the review, I hadn't seen Ghostbusters in HD. On VHS that shit was a muddy, surreal, bloomy mess and it was impossible to make out what exactly was going on with Gozer's costume or the weird shit in front of the pyramid. I thought that was the whole point of depicting an interdimensional being at their seat of power and seeing the HD footage is actually a small letdown. Oh, my childhood memories.
Beerman462
Member
The woman was just a form that Gozer took. Gozer summoned the destructor and they closed the portal when they crossed the streams which cut Gozer's connection to the living or whatever.
Bingo. Now imagine the family member is Mcarthy's Uncle Ray who has gotten the girls to take over his old business. Now you have a character we care about and you've tied it back to the original movie.
Instead of the bullshit tech, have Mckinnon bitch about the old dusty tech and how she can add a few modifications.
Now just fire feig, hire a competent writer and stick to the script, and we'd have a decent ghostbusters movie, even with this same cast.
pirateluigi
Member
This was one of my favorite Plinkett reviews. I think everyone knew that GB16 didn't work, but the deep dive really helps illustrate why.
The side by side comparisons with the original were damning, especially of the opening scene.
The side by side comparisons with the original were damning, especially of the opening scene.
Interestingly enough, in their Re:View show about it, they make the point that the movie is about science conquering superstition, but it's a very surface note and not the historical reading you want, but it is indeed an interesting start point. Heck, without going too meta on this, it might actually be an opportunity for you to make that kind of commentary and put it out there!
First half was pretty bad, rambling rant with no real point that was losing me and really feeling like this was a big mistake, but once he got into the actual plot stuff and direction it was a pretty good critique that was more or less fair and not overly reactive, but instead pretty cogent and consistent in addressing what was wrong and why.
Overall a fair assessment with the classic Mr. Plinkett overreactions and shock comments. Not really that illuminating or super entertaining though. It only barely justifies its existence.
Would have preferred a Stark Trek Beyond review, get back to your roots Mr. Plinkett.
Overall a fair assessment with the classic Mr. Plinkett overreactions and shock comments. Not really that illuminating or super entertaining though. It only barely justifies its existence.
Would have preferred a Stark Trek Beyond review, get back to your roots Mr. Plinkett.
Tinfoilhatsron
Banned
Plinkett says he also likes Spy later in the review, huh.
BassForever
Member
It's also possible to enjoy ghost busters 2
And it's possible to not enjoy ghost busters 2
But we can all agree it's not possible to enjoy the first ghost busters cartoon with the gorilla
It's possible to enjoy an ice cream cone and a bowl of dog shit.
Me, I'll stick to the ice cream.
Beerman462
Member
I want to see the Plinkette edit of the movie now.
It's also possible to enjoy a movie and acknowledge it's faults.
It's also possible to enjoy a movie and acknowledge it's faults.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I thought Spy was pretty good. Decent character arc; decent jokes; good performing cast
This
Glass Shark
Banned
I think the reboot had some funny jokes, but this review sums up why it's not very good overall and why it pales in comparison to the original as a comedy
granted, the same points could have been relayed in like 10 minutes without beating a dead horse, but whatever
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
The main thing i learned from this so far is that Jack and Jill had a Dunkin Donuts commercial/musical number with Al Pacino
Dude Abides
Banned
Topical!
Frozenprince
Banned
And it's the BEST thing in the movie. And it's soul crushing.
Not a quality film, is what I'm saying.
TwEE-N-Toast
Banned
I've never watched a Plinkett review. I know him as the background dude from Half in the Bag. But this isn't him. Im weirded out and don't think I'll ever trust again.
I feel the same way about Dungeons and Dragons and how it lead to Satanism being hip with the youth culture.
Dude Abides?
I feel the same way about Dungeons and Dragons and how it lead to Satanism being hip with the youth culture.
Dude Abides?
I just finished it and it was an excellent review, they really did a good job of showing the faults of Ghostbusters 2016. Ever since I saw it I felt like it was more like a Scary movie type parody of Ghostbusters rather than a Ghostbusters film and this review gives some great examples of that.
Great review, definitely better than that dreadful TFA review.
I think the most eye opening moment for me was Paul Feig's comment where he didn't even know the Wizard of Oz reference. In a movie that he co-wrote and directed, a song that they had to pay thousands of dollars in licensing fees towards, and he didn't even know what it was in reference to.
I have nothing against Pail Feig and the cast of this movie in general, but that moment really illustrated to me how out of control this production must have been, and it shows in the end result.
I think the most eye opening moment for me was Paul Feig's comment where he didn't even know the Wizard of Oz reference. In a movie that he co-wrote and directed, a song that they had to pay thousands of dollars in licensing fees towards, and he didn't even know what it was in reference to.
I have nothing against Pail Feig and the cast of this movie in general, but that moment really illustrated to me how out of control this production must have been, and it shows in the end result.
I wanted this film to turn out great. I like the director, I like all of the actors involved.
I had no problem with a mostly female cast... And I thought people were judging it early, which they did, but....
It turned out to be a terrible movie, and it diserves to be cut to pieces in the end. All of that bull shit nonsense turned out to be true.
It was that bad.
I had no problem with a mostly female cast... And I thought people were judging it early, which they did, but....
It turned out to be a terrible movie, and it diserves to be cut to pieces in the end. All of that bull shit nonsense turned out to be true.
It was that bad.
Beerman462
Member
Bill Murray is kind of an asshole. Whenever I see the dumb Bill Murray sticker on someones car I roll my eyes out of my head.
Let that shit go.
I'll take Steve Martin thanks.
Annie Pots looks great
Let that shit go.
I'll take Steve Martin thanks.
Annie Pots looks great
Sixfortyfive
He who pursues two rabbits gets two rabbits.
Doesn't really have any of the typical Plinkett humor or style, so overall this feels really redundant with their original Half in the Bag review. But there's still lots of behind the scenes material and juxtaposition against the original movie to justify what's here. And they probably wanted to make a point of having their subject matter stick strictly to the movie here.
Way better than the TFA review, in which Mike thought it was a good idea to spend half his time arguing against prequel fan-wank theories for some reason.
(And it makes that dumpster fire of a thread from yesterday look even worse in retrospect, of course.)
Jack and Jill might have been the best HITB review they've done, seriously:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXNsT7-Lwsk
Way better than the TFA review, in which Mike thought it was a good idea to spend half his time arguing against prequel fan-wank theories for some reason.
(And it makes that dumpster fire of a thread from yesterday look even worse in retrospect, of course.)
Jack and Jill might have been the best HITB review they've done, seriously:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXNsT7-Lwsk
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
No. People hate it.
Beerman462
Member
It worked better in the earlier videos. I think he could drop it at this point. Seems like they might be going that way, because they didn't have much of the classic Plinkett character moments.
I would prefer Scientist Man
Finished watching the video. This is my first Red Letter Media video in general, and I never watched the reboot Ghostbuster movie, and only watched the original Ghostbusters movie when I was a kid. Biggest takeaway from this is that I should rewatch the original Ghostbuster movie.
Also, that Paul Feig just didn't do his main job as a director, which you know. Direct.
Also, that Paul Feig just didn't do his main job as a director, which you know. Direct.
Most people who enjoy comedy, would put both Bill Murray and Steve Martin up there.
And I have no idea what you are going with concerning Bill Murray stickers.
Never seen it once, and I have seen "Kill a gay baby whale for Jesus." Multiple times on the back of cars in Texas.
What state are these pro Bill Murray bumper stickers popping up?
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
Jack and Jill is a commercial itself
Dark_3nergy
Member
Me too. I saw the edit he did with the 2016 version when the girls where in a subway to try and test the gear out. And how much intention he filled it with by added some tiny things. Then he compared it to the talk talk talky mess of the original.
Whole movie really did need less talking. It's so surprising how much better the dialog in 1984 Ghostbusters was compared to 2016.
BassForever
Member
He did the job sony asked him to do
He directed the cast to make sure they weren't blocking any of the product placement