Sixfortyfive
He who pursues two rabbits gets two rabbits.
That's the fucking joke though.
Sharp knees man, like you really give a shit until someone told you that you should give a shit.
You're serious?
That's the fucking joke though.
Sharp knees man, like you really give a shit until someone told you that you should give a shit.
The sad thing is you could have very easily made a scene full of real jokes out of her eating chips without having to degrade to the lowest common denominator "remember that" reference joke.
1) make a joke about her "finding something" and it's a bag of chips
2) make a joke about them being quiet and she's crunchy the chips loudly
2.5) make a joke where she thinks they're mad at her because she didn't offer to share
3) make a joke where she suggests maybe the ghost is hungry and offers a chip
4) make the joke they made about her eating casually when they find the ghost, just without the reference
5) when the ghost barfs vomit, have her be more upset it got on the chips then it covering wig
I came up with that in like 30 seconds, any of the above would be funnier then what Sony did, because Sony wasn't trying to make a funny scene, they were trying to advertise pringles.
None of those are good.
Neither was the one in the movie.
Not really, but Plinkett's and RLM get a lot of love. People say it's because they back everything up, like it proves their that RLM is right and people can have their confirmation bias internet pat on the back from each other.
I think the most interesting thing about GB16 is everything that took place around the movie... because in the end the movie was just an average reboot that was harmless.
Plinkett reviews get a lot of love because, with few exceptions, they provide a deep dive into the strengths and weaknesses of a movie and provide thoughtful critical analysis while highlighting many examples from each film. you need only watch this Ghostbusters review to see that.
Plinkett reviews get a lot of love because, with few exceptions, they provide a deep dive into the strengths and weaknesses of a movie and provide thoughtful critical analysis while highlighting many examples from each film. you need only watch this Ghostbusters review to see that.
I thought it did a poor job of that with a tired ass gimmick. It spent too much time on stuff that was pointless, and did a poor job backing up most of what he was trying to prove.
Not to mention some people from the industry have even praised the reviews, like Kevin Smith and Simon Pegg. Plus Simon Pegg said he showed the Episode 1 review to JJ Abrams and supposedly he thought it was really good.
That's the fucking joke though.
The most baffling thing about this NervousXtian character is their seeming inability to grasp the basic premise of an Internet forum.
This is the Off-Topic Discussion forum, for discussing things. The clue is in the title.
Here is a good example of a discussion:
Person A: "I didn't like thing."
Person B: "Why?"
Person A: "[explanation for why Person A didn't like thing]"
And here, for contrast, is an example of a really weird thing that happened in this thread instead:
Person A: "I didn't like thing."
Person B: "Why?"
Person A: "Am I not allowed to post in this thread? Are my knees too blunt?"
I think we found Paul Feig's GAF-account.
That rotten tomatoes score seems way to high for this movie.
Can't be seen as being on the wrong side
Sure, but this thread is also, at times, following the trend of:
Person A: "I don't like thing."
Person B: "Why?"
Person A: "Explains what rubs them the wrong way."
Persons C-Z: "WHY DONT YOU LIKE WHAT I LIKE!?!?!"
Sure, but this thread is also, at times, following the trend of:
Person A: "I don't like thing."
Person B: "Why?"
Person A: "Explains what rubs them the wrong way."
Persons C-Z: "WHY DONT YOU LIKE WHAT I LIKE!?!?!"
hmm, haven't seen much of that in this thread. receipts?
Oh look. There he is.
The pringles thing seems weird because in a movie with shameless product placement, the director and writers are claiming that they just picked a random bag (or in this case, can) of chips so she could have something to eat in the scene.
But why chips? And why Pringles? And why do you have to the logo prominently displayed and have her say the slogan? It's just disingenuous is all, and if they're lying about that, why the heck would they care enough to lie about that?
There's just no reason to lie about that, and the fact that they did just shows at how embarrassed they were about the whole production.
Thanks for giving it a fair chance and basing you opinion on the critical analysis.I have never seen this guy's reviews so I started watching this one and after 10 seconds I had to stop.
Why does it has to make that annoying voice? Can't he talk normally? I am not sure if this was suppose to be funny but it isn't.
Thanks for giving it a fair chance and basing you opinion on the critical analysis.
Maybe he has great reviews but still I cant't stand his voice.
I thought the same before and bailed after about 10 seconds on another one. But today I decided to force myself watch the Star Wars Episode I review as I know that if I'm gonna agree with anything it would be that.I have never seen this guy's reviews so I started watching this one and after 10 seconds I had to stop.
Why does it has to make that annoying voice? Can't he talk normally? I am not sure if this was suppose to be funny but it isn't.
I thought the same before and bailed after about 10 seconds on another one. But today I decided to force myself watch the Star Wars Episode I review as I know that if I'm gonna agree with anything it would be that.
Sure enough I got over the voice as soon as I realised he was making some really valid points, now I actively enjoy it and will probably watch this Ghostbusters one once I've actually seen the movie. But yeah, the voice was a struggle until my mind had figured out the act he was playing.
Guys, when is the next movie in SONY's GHOST CORPS film going to be released?
I thought the same before and bailed after about 10 seconds on another one. But today I decided to force myself watch the Star Wars Episode I review as I know that if I'm gonna agree with anything it would be that.
Sure enough I got over the voice as soon as I realised he was making some really valid points, now I actively enjoy it and will probably watch this Ghostbusters one once I've actually seen the movie. But yeah, the voice was a struggle until my mind had figured out the act he was playing.
The pringles thing seems weird because in a movie with shameless product placement, the director and writers are claiming that they just picked a random bag (or in this case, can) of chips so she could have something to eat in the scene.
But why chips? And why Pringles? And why do you have to the logo prominently displayed and have her say the slogan? It's just disingenuous is all, and if they're lying about that, why the heck would they care enough to lie about that?
There's just no reason to lie about that, and the fact that they did just shows at how embarrassed they were about the whole production.
You know they shot scenes multiple times. Could have started harmless and then turned the can to force the joke more. I mean there's reasons that they aren't lying about the scene that make it less sinister.
I mean you jump to the conclusion that it's a lie. Maybe it is maybe it isn't. But there's very explainable reasons that it doesn't have to be.
I have never seen this guy's reviews so I started watching this one and after 10 seconds I had to stop.
Why does it has to make that annoying voice? Can't he talk normally? I am not sure if this was suppose to be funny but it isn't.
A joke isn't saying the slogan verbatim. A joke is supposed to subvert and mock the subject they're they're riffing on. When Will Ferrell said that Applebees (Talladega Nights)were were a shitty place to eat, that was commenting on their marketing that it's a safe and family oriented place to eat.
What's the joke with Pringles?
Actually if you took the logo off the pringles can the joke still worked. Because it's a pop culture reference we all know.
Whether you think it's funny or not, doesn't matter.
The pringles thing seems weird because in a movie with shameless product placement, the director and writers are claiming that they just picked a random bag (or in this case, can) of chips so she could have something to eat in the scene.
But why chips? And why Pringles? And why do you have to the logo prominently displayed and have her say the slogan? It's just disingenuous is all, and if they're lying about that, why the heck would they care enough to lie about that?
There's just no reason to lie about that, and the fact that they did just shows at how embarrassed they were about the whole production.
The cynical answer is that directors like Feig are so used to having to do product placment that they don't even notice anymore. It's just second nature for them to shove product placement into a movie, even if it wasn't intended to be there.
But yeah, the voice was a struggle until my mind had figured out the act he was playing.
This is so clearly what happened I don't even know why it's being debated.I think the answer is that since everything is improv, and people in their 30s are basically just reference machines, McKinnon just started spouting the catchphrases that she's learned as a kid.
Like later in the review she sings that song from The Wizard of Oz, which Feig couldn't recognize and said they had to pay 10k to license. She probably didn't intend or plan to sing the song, but it was just one of a thousand improv takes that they used and she probably did it because she saw the movie as a kid and it's one of the things that just popped out of her brain.
Sorry I worded that badly. It's obviously an act, but at first it's nothing but a weird voice, then you start to get some context with the disturbing basement videos etc. That's when I 'got it' and stopped hating it.Isn't it....blatantly obvious it's an act?
That probably says more about McKinnon's improv abilities though if all she can do is reference stuff.This is so clearly what happened I don't even know why it's being debated.
That probably says more about McKinnon's improv abilities though if all she can do is reference stuff.
The pringles thing seems weird because in a movie with shameless product placement, the director and writers are claiming that they just picked a random bag (or in this case, can) of chips so she could have something to eat in the scene.
But why chips? And why Pringles? And why do you have to the logo prominently displayed and have her say the slogan? It's just disingenuous is all, and if they're lying about that, why the heck would they care enough to lie about that?
There's just no reason to lie about that, and the fact that they did just shows at how embarrassed they were about the whole production.
Do you really not understand the joke?
People can't be this dim. The joke is she won't stop making noise eating. Then Pringles slogan.
Is it high grade humor. No. But failing yo grasp the joke reflects poorly on you.
What probably happened was they wrote the scene with the general description of "woman is eating something while wackiness ensues" and then plugged in Pringles when the check cleared.
That way the writer can claim it was just a generic foodstuff in the script and the scene can be product placement.
The criticism of the film is very good. But the product placement stuff is not very interesting or enlightening.
I think the answer is that since everything is improv, and people in their 30s are basically just reference machines, McKinnon just started spouting the catchphrases that she's learned as a kid.
Like later in the review she sings that song from The Wizard of Oz, which Feig couldn't recognize and said they had to pay 10k to license. She probably didn't intend or plan to sing the song, but it was just one of a thousand improv takes that they used and she probably did it because she saw the movie as a kid and it's one of the things that just popped out of her brain.
I just like to give the actresses a bit of benefit of doubt. But then again this movie pre-release/release campaign was just weird. Still not sure if they were praising Hemsworth or tried to shift blame on him for the "Mike Hat" joke.
"He came up with it all by himself!"
Erm, yeah, I sure hope no writer got paid for that.