***Update 1 – 2016-08-03 – 01:20 CEST***

I honestly didn´t think that we would end up having our homepage being pulled down to the publication of this post on the 29th of July (it was most likely caused by overload attacks. One thing is for sure though. Someeone got really mad at this article). Neither did I think that there would be such a lot of fuss about the fact that Paul Feig´s “Ghostbusters 2016” is indeed a big box office flop. Well, I was wrong. As people started to flock to our comment section to defend Feig and his movie.

sony-pictures-lays-off-20 in marketing distribution team

Sony is running a full damage control to cover up the failure of the “Ghostbusters” 2016 movie. However, posts like this speaks for itself really (you don´t lay people off when business is good).

Don´t get me wrong now, people are free to think and say what they want on our homepage. I´m just surprised to see how blind some people can be (read through the comments on this post, and you will understand what I mean), because no matter how many box office numbers, reviews and fact´s people presented to the supporters of the “Ghostbusters 2016” movie. The defenders of the movie simply couldn´t admit that the movie was a box office failure (and it still is), even though the numbers don’t lie (I guess that math wasn´t their best subject in school?).

And a perfect example of such a defender would be Jeff Rouner and his Houston Press article “Ghostbusters Remake Now Officially Not a Flop“. I mean, the guy is beyond delusional. And speaking of which, one of our readers (Mr. Johny Johnson) made a really good comment on the matter of “Ghostbusters 2016” and it´s box office numbers:

“Actually, it needs to make closer to $400 million to break even. It will lose Sony somewhere between $150 million and $200 million. It’s one of the biggest flops since The Lone Ranger.

As of the 2 week mark, this film has made $130 million worldwide ($94 mil dom / $36 mil int’l). The “break even” number (according to many media sources) is between $375 million – $400 million. Now, how is this estimate derived? Well, I will try my best to explain.

Production on the film was $144 million. Marketing/advertising/distribution was roughly $150 million (which brings it to around $300 million). A film doesn’t get all the box office receipts – it is usually between 1/2 and 2/3 of a box office domestically. So, if a film makes say $200 million at the box office, the company actually takes in somewhere between $100 million and $135 million depending on the length of its run, etc. So, taking all that into account, to break even, this movie needs to make back the $290 million they have put into it (production+marketing+ads+distribution). Under the high end 2/3 box office ratio, that means it would need to $435 million worldwide box office to break even. Under the 1/2 box office ration, it would need to make $580 million to recoup its costs. The middle figure for the 1/2 to 2/3 is just north of $500 million Now, they will obviously get some money from merchandising and DVD sales. A legitimate estimate for that would be around $100 million. Which would put the necessary box office take to break even at $400 million:

Production+marketing+advertising+distribution = $290 million
To break even box office under the 1/2 – 2/3 rule = roughly $500 million
Minus the profits from merchandising/DVD sales = around $100 million
Worldwide box office to break even = around $400 million

So, right now it is at $130 million worldwide and poised to be in 8th place in this weekend’s box office (according to BoxOfficeMojo). This thing may top out around $200 million worldwide – which would put it about $200 million short of what it needs just to break even. So, another monster loss for Sony and one of the biggest busts in recent memory.”

ghostbusters remake now officially not a flop

Math, do you know it!?

Well, I think you get my point. I would also like to add that it´s not likely that the movie will do any good in South Korea, Japan, China nor Mexico. As the movie is banned in China, and Mexico and South Korea don’t even seem to be on Imdb´s list over releases for “Ghostbusters 2016”. Furthermore, please allow me to give you some context on the matter of South Korea and Western movies. “Dirty Grandpa” ranked in at #90, pulling in about 500K USD, “Bridesmaids” pulled in similar numbers. And “The Heat” wasn’t even shown in South Korea at all… As for Japan. Well, the Japanese doesn´t like “man hating”, feminist movies all that much (and rightfully so).

bye bye ghostbusters 2016 the game

It was bound to happen, as neither the trailer (nor the E3 demo) impressed people all that much. And let´s not forget the fact that the game is based on a rather bad movie as well…

And speaking of flops and box office failures. I don´t know if you have already heard the news, but Fireforge Games had to file for a chapter 7 bankruptcy with debts of up to $12 million. As the official Ghostbusters video game went bankrupt after just three days after its release (the game was released on the 12th of July for Windows, PS4 and Xbox One). And truth be told, that´s just yet another failure that can be added to the giant stack of blunders called “Ghostbusters 2016”.

ghostbusters game dies

Fireforge Games developed the game in just eight months (a multi-format title). And just as I (and others) expected, the game turned out to be anything but good (the metacritic score is 31/100 for the PS4 version).

And you know what? All of this makes me really sad, because none of this would have happened if Sony had picked the right director for the “Ghostbusters” reboot. It´s also pure madness to develop a multi-format movie licensed game in just eight months (it´s a rather well-known fact that movie licensed games tend to turn out rather badly, especially games with short development deadlines). So in my opinion, Sony wasted a really good chance to reboot the “Ghostbusters” IP (the kids don’t even like the toys. And around the world, the toys are being removed from the store’s shelves as we speak…).

So let´s face it people, “Ghostbusters 2016” is not the movie that the fans wanted or asked for. And it has just brought a lot of negativity into the “Ghostbusters” IP as well (the drama, the bad reviews, the bad box office numbers and now the bankruptcy of a game studio). I don´t know about you, but my best advice would be to forget about the movie and the video game all together. And just watch the old movies and play the “Ghostbusters: The Video Game” (the 2009 edition) instead.

Source:
‘Ghostbusters’ Video Game Developers File for Bankruptcy 3 Days After Game’s Release
Hollywoodintoto
Sony Pictures Lays Off 20 in Marketing, Distribution Team
Sony zaps jobs following poor results in US

Credit:
Christian Toto
Hom-Ru-Beoulve
brandnewhistory
—————————————————
Ghostbusters has drummed up some serious hysteria since its release
. Leslie Jones managed to get Briebart editor Milo Yianopoulos banned from Twitter, and sick packs of rabid fans upon critics of the movie.

mark kern ghostbusters 2016 user rating

I hardly doubt that the user score will ever go above 2.9.

We also saw the terrible reviews that rolled in citing the movie was trying too hard. For what it’s worth, the movie is a great idea to promote female characters as strong leads, and it had quite a few laughs. Nevertheless, this movie was not the best choice for that approach. A much better choice is the upcoming Wonder Woman starring Gal Godot, and that 2017 summer picture will deliver in spades for DC.

deadpool vs ghostbusters 2016

In other words, even though “Deadpool” had an almost 100 million USD smaller budget. The movie still made +700 million USD more than “Ghostbusters 2016” did.

The all-female spectre busting quartet managed to secure $46 million in its opening weekend, but it doesn’t appear to be quite enough for a profit. Sony put up a serious budget to get the movie made. With over $144 million invested in Director Paul Feig, and analysts realizing movies such as Star Trek, and Jason Bourne’s earning potential its a dark day for Ghostbusters.

ghostbusters 2016 burning money

And still Sony want´s to make a “Ghostbusters 2016” part II movie…

To date, “Ghostbusters” has grossed about $130 million worldwide. However, that’s not even half of what they’ll need to break even and see a profit from the film. If they can make $300 million in sales, that would be a true revival of the franchise and secure a great presence for a sequel but can it happen? With the rumor mill circling that Sony and Paul Feig have decided on three films, it would be on Sony’s best interest to change directors, writers, or even come up with new original ideas for the cast.

twitter and ghostbusters 2016

If you didn´t know it, Milo Yiannopoulos (Greek-British journalist, entrepreneur and technology editor for Breitbart.com) has been permanently banned from Twitter.

The most painful thing about a reboot is that it has to surpass the expectations of the previous movies, and “Ghostbusters” will never do that. The simplest answer is: because the talent was wasted, the script wasn’t original, and the director was trying to prove a point with his established comedy style using comedianne’s instead of male actors.

paul feig is a cuck

Paul Feig (Director and writer for “Ghostbusters 2016”) turned his “Ghostbusters” movie into a feminist/anti-male propaganda machine. In short, the movie was anything but the movie that the “Ghostbusters” fans wanted.

The identicle formula won’t work the same way every time, but that’s something Paul Feig refuses to understand. Success isn’t always measured by the outcome, its measured through effort, balance, and training.

In short, the movie was created and shot as a tribute film with a vendetta that didn’t land a mark on the classical 80’s comedy. It might as well have had a neon sign that said Don’t ask any questions. Just give us your money. And if there ever was one thing that made the advocates angry about the movie it was the comment ” Aint no bitches gonna bust no ghosts,” and that appears to be the case here also.

Source:
The Wrap
boxofficemojo
The-numbers

Credit:
Robin Ek – Editor
Mr Silvio – Tipster
Sandwichhead – Tipster

tgg author avatar kenya peterson
Kenay Peterson
The Gaming Ground
Twitter: @TheDark_Mage

Related Posts


More by Kenay Peterson:

Tags: , , , ,

EwinRacing Calling Series Gaming Chairs

Save 3$ with our Play-Asia coupon code "thegg"

393 Comments ON " Paul Feig´s Ghostbusters 2016 flops really hard at... "
  • Mr Silvio

    Leslie Jones deleted this tweet. I wonder why? Uhm…

  • Nanya

    Just to compare…

    Ghostbusters 1984 had to compete against Gremlins, Star Trek III, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Police Academy and Footloose and still got the #1 spot.

    Ghostbusters 2016 had to compete against Finding Dory, Secret Life of Pets, The Legend of Tarzan and only got the #2 spot.

    BTW, Secret Life of Pets had a budget of around 1/2 that of the 2016 Ghostbusters and made over 231 million.

    • Phillip Lamb

      Seeing as how none of those movies came out on the same weekend as Ghostbusters, it should have been clear sailing for the movie with nothing to really compete against, and yet it still lost out to movie that had already been out for a week.

      It was a bad idea (not the women cast mind you), and was defending for the wrong reasons.

  • jlenoconel

    Its not quite Glitter by Mariah Carey flop, but its not reached $100,000,000 domestically in two weeks on a close to $150,000,000 budget. I think there’s potential for another sequel unfortunately, but the budget for it will be much, much smaller.

    • bigevilworldwide1 .

      Ummm hate to break it to you but GLOBALLY its made 135,000,000 on a 144,000,000 budget…Far from a fucking flop, get the fuck over it. Its not going to make a billion but its going to end up a success….Love it when idiots take a movie needed to make 400 million to break even out of something the director said, he was talking out of his ass….Much like the pathetic people still obsessed with shitting on it every chance they get 2 weeks after release…….

      • Venaborn

        ” Far from a fucking flop ” Yeaah I hate to break it to you but this movies if we counting marketing price, cost at least 250 millions to make. And that lowest estimate. 300 – 350M is far more likely. In America at best it make around 160M. That not so bad, but movie will be extremly lucky if it makes 70M internationally and that just terrible for summer blockusters like Ghostbusters.
        So at best movie will be slightly in minus. At best. That called box office flop.

      • helicopter

        Looks like you are the idiot here

        Ghostbusters production cost amount to $144,000,000, its marketing, another $100,000,000… a total of $240,000,000.

        Your $135,000,000 figure is a worldwide gross which would mean that you have to factor in the cut that the theater operators will receive. Domestically, Sony will only take atleast 50% – 66% of the revenue, outside the US it could go down to only 30% – 40%

        50% of $135,000,000 is $67,500,000, thats not even a half of $144,000,000…. and way below $240,000,000 total cost.

        only a stupid ignorant idiot will not to realize such simple industry fact

      • MyButtHurts

        bigevilworldwide1

        I’m waiting for you to respond to helicopter reply comments.

        Because you are THE BIG IDIOT HERE!!

      • Destro Hu55ein

        Nah it’s a flop cuh, you’re forgetting marketing & theater costs. It won’t do much better going forward. Getting mad won’t help

      • Nick G

        What a butt hurt bitch. Doesnt know a flop when they see one. Dead pool made over 700 million on half the budget dumbass. This movies is horrible and not only are you a dishonest fuck but an incredibly stupid one. The movies production budget was 144 million! Thats not breaking even, they still have to pay for all the advertising, and did you not read what he wrote about the box office ratio? Any one who actually saw this movie and still stands up for it is OBVIOUSLY a cuck or a feminist bitch. Oh and the movie needs to make ATLEAST over 300 million to BREAK EVEN. Even if they do break even, the movie is still a fucking flop! you dont seem to understand how business works. You dont make a movie to break even. You make a movie to make a profit. so unless they do better than there first week (which they wont) there not going to see a profit off this movie. The first ghost buster came in #1 against much much tougher movies. This movie came in #2 and literally had NOTHING to compete with. This isnt coming from the DIRECTOR, this is coming from Sony DUMBASS. We will see what happens in the next month and I will be back here to see what you have to say then you fucking cuck.

      • Daltos

        Don’t look at things through rose-tinted glasses, that’s only going to lead to you getting proved wrong by the people who aren’t wearing them. The numbers don’t like. The closest they’ll get to a win is if they manage to break even.

      • Steve Smith

        I think at this point enough people have enlightened you to how the box office revenue industry works.

      • jlenoconel

        Erm, aren’t they supposed to break even? If they lost money its not much of a success is it?

      • Bruce Wayne

        er you fail to add in all the additional cost besides production…like omg bro..advertising isn’t free dumbass…hence the reason this turd of a movie needs to make all that additional money

      • Thundercleese

        LOL, you didn’t comprehend the article did you.
        It flopped. Big time. Get the fuck over it. It’s not going to make billions.
        It’s not even going to make millions. Not even a few. Not even a couple.
        It didn’t break even. Who was talking out of their ass again?
        Pathetic people who obsess with raising this piece of crap to a higher stander that it clearly did not reach.
        And where is it now? *crickets*

  • BlueBoomPony

    Lesson: if people react poorly to your trailer, don’t call half your potential audience terrible, hateful things.

    I thought the first trailer for this was badly done, and I was touting the idea of a female Ghostbusters team over 10 years ago, so, yeah, not really a misogynist here. It just wasn’t a good trailer.

    Making trailers is a whole minor art form of its own. You can make bad trailers for good films and good trailers for bad films. On YouTube there’s people who make funny trailers for old films that completely make it look like a different film. There’s a horror trailer for Mary Poppins. One that makes The Shining look like a summer romcom.

    One fan even recut the GB trailer and made it worlds better.

    • Spartas Edge

      I’m not a mysoginist either, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a mistake to have an all-female cast for this, because it was. People are too reserved and apscared to speak their minds ghese days for fear of political correctness, but that is stifling free thought and expression in certain instances.

      • PHILL SHIVELY

        Well I’m A MYSOGYNIST Because FUCK IT AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS FEM BUSTERS WAS DESTINED TO FAIL Because EGONS GHOST HAUNTED THIS ABOMINATION

        • Spartas Edge

          Well i actually prefer your straight up plain speaking and openness and saying what your thinking, than all this tip-toeing political correctness and being told what to think to be honest.

      • Katara c.

        Honestly, I don’t see how saying having an all-lady cast was a mistake could be anything BUT misogyny. I’m the last person you’ll see on the PC bandwagon, but when the main criticism is that the main characters are women, how can you see it as anything but sexism? Especially that I’ve rarely seen any reason as to *why* it was a mistake.

        • Spartas Edge

          Wow, longest….reply time….ever!…..Lol ;D

          I would say to that you are looking at and taking it in a very basic and black and white way, and it does seems like jumping on the pc bandwagon is exactly what you are doing, but indeed, perhaps my comment needs more explanation, and i am happy to elaborate on and will explain exactly why i less ‘think’ it was a mistake, but more WHY it was a mistake, as my statement mirrors the pretty much universally general consensus that the film was terrible, with the cast being cited as a significantly contributing factor to that.

          Its not misogyny and i will tell you why. Some roles are just better with females, some are better with men, that’s not sexism or misogyny, its just being realistic, and is not a disparagement to either gender and nor should it be. Some things just don’t and won’t work if you mess with the established genders (Both ways, not just male to female) of something. For example, would people accept a Charlie’s Angels reboot if the Angels were men? Or would they accept a Godfather remake if the gender roles were reversed? Would a Thelma and Loiuse remake be accepted and better or as good with men? Would the Aliens films be better if they had it a male protagonist instead of Ripley? Probably not.. and i can say that as a man. I’m a man and i would understand, i can look at it logically and rationally and would understand those people’s points and agree its better as it is, without crying about it and feeling that my gender was hard done by, or that that my gender was somehow discriminated against merely because the roles worked better with the opposite gender.

          Okay, with that in mind, back to Ghostbusters. I’ll look past the fact that the cast was just not funny and practically living cartoon characters, as that does not relate to gender. You wanted me to say why it doesn’t work as well with a female cast, and as you requested, i will explain why i said what i did and tell you the specific reasons it does not work with an all-female cast, which are as follows…

          Firstly, the roles are simply associated with males, and with Ghostbusters being a huge childhood/cult favourite with people, that’s a huge aspect to change. Secondly, one of the big appeals and what made the originals funny, was the chemistry between the characters, mainly provided by the rough housing verbal man-banter between them. They would routinely mock and rib each other, and this kind of banter just works better with men, it just does, just some kinds of humour etc works better between female characters. Men don’t have the mutual respect and politeness that women are more associated with, and with an all-female cast, the banter was gone and replaced with the exact kind of sisterhood solidarity that your are illustrating here, by crying misogyny, never mind that fact that the movie and casting was terrible, regardless of gender. The banter was not there as i say and it was just not funny, and they were just not funny, and it felt like it was an all-female cast purely for the sake of it, and to try to appear fresh by such a big change up, the trouble is, it just doesn’t work, and this is all vindicated and exemplified by the overweening general consensus that it turned out to be a pretty bad film, with the cast cited as a big part of the reason as i say, so i feel my expression that making it an all female cast, was very valid and i if anything statement and reasoning for it, were ultimately proven correct, knowing now how it all turned out when the dust settled. No matter how much you protest and cry misogyny, the fact that the film performed so poorly and the main reasons given for that were the cast, ultimately proves and validated what i said, but believe me, if they announced a reboot of the Alien films with a male cast in the role of Ripley,i’d be the first to complain about that too, it can and should go both ways.

          • Katara c.

            Yeah, re: the late reply, I just saw the movie recently & was like, “What the heck, this was a decent movie, why all the hate?” so I was looking it up 😛

            If people who *loved* the original just don’t like having the characters messed with, that’s something I can let go (I’ve never been particularly attached to the original franchise, but if it was one I *did* care about, I might feel the same way, so I get it). But that aside, I can’t see any reason why Ghostbusters *must* be “simply associated with males”. It might’ve gone over better if they did the whole “passing the torch” thing they had talked about, rather than a reboot, sure.

            Otherwise… well sorry to say, but I really do find your views to be mildly sexist. I mean, mocking and ribbing works better with men? Man-banter? Women are associated with mutual respect and politeness? …. do you KNOW any women? Straight up, women can be anything but mutually respectful and polite (in both good and bad ways), and women who are good friends often rib each other and joke around and we can get downright weird. Banter is hardly restricted to men. Just the fact that you called it “sisterhood solidarity” shows that you’re already coming at it from a perspective that anything with unstereotypical female roles carries some kind of feminist agenda… which is probably why you say I’m “crying misogyny” and “crying about my gender being hard done by” or “jumping on the PC bandwagon” cos I couldn’t see a good reason why an all-female cast was a bad thing.

            I mean, what, women being friends and goofing around together = feminist sisterhood solidarity? Lighten up a little!

            I agree that they did the all female cast just to mix things up, just for the heck of it – but fanboys aside, who cares? And sure, some of the casting didn’t work (personally I loved Holtzmann, Abby was fine, but Jones and Wiig could’ve been better imo). I’d watch any of those reboots you threw out there (though I might lament the loss of Ripley, just cos she was a good character… otherwise, I don’t care).

            Honestly, though I don’t always love Feig’s humour, I do find his portrayals of women pretty refreshing cos unlike most movies with women in them, it reminds me a lot of myself and my friends, and that’s just nice to see sometimes. Saying that doesn’t make me some kind of crazy feminist SJW – personally I think modern feminism IS mostly crazy, but I also think that craziness is making you over-react to the casting of the movie.

          • Spartas Edge

            Well you redeemed your slow reply with the subsequent very quick one i guess lol ;D

            What can i say, your in the vast minority by your own admission, of people who liked this film.

            You have this whole problem with me saying that Ghostbusters didn’t work with an all-female team (which was vindicated by the overwhelming general reception to the film i may add), with accusations of misogyny and sexism, while at the same same time, when i put it to you, you said that you wouldn’t like it if Ripley was re-cast as a man in a scenario of an Alien reboot, which i could say is a bit of a double standard. The very second you said that, you completely undermined and contradicted your whole argument, because that’s the EXACT SAME thing i and others had been saying about the Ghostbusters team, so if i am sexist, then you are too by your own definition.

            The roles in Ghostbusters, dare i say a much loved duo of films, are associated with men, just like Ripley and other female roles are associated with women, so its not like i am taking a pro men stance, such as the one you seem to be taking with women, otherwise why would you be defending such badly played and portrayed caricature parts, played in such a bad or not particularly good at best film.. you do seem very bias, and therefore in your own way, sexist, because its okay you you to say a part is better played by a female, but men can’t say the same about this, and that itself is discrimination, hypocritical, and as i say a double standard.

            So with this in mind, I disagree with your accusation of sexism, because its not sexist to say it as it is and acknowledge the realities of the world, and i am equally passionate about males not playing roles that would be better played by a female, than women playing roles associated with men, so its not like i’m pro men. I would be the first to complain if they made an Alien reboot with a man being cast in Riply’s role, for example, so at least my stance extends to both genders, while your does not seem to, it only seems to extend one way.

            Take a look at most films and culture, solidarity among women is more pronounced, certainly in media, most likely because they didn’t have equal rights for a long time, and in some cultures, still don’t, while banter is associated with men, so don’t shoot the messenger, this is how it is with defined gender roles and characteristics in society, i did not create this, i am just pointing it out the reality, and dare i say its not just men that perpetuate gender stereotypes, women themselves sustain stereotypes by acting a certain way and doing certain things that are associated with women, and they express stereotypical statements about men, such as ‘All men are pigs’ etc, be it in jest or seriousness as do men with their stereotypes and gender specific behaviour, and lets not kid ourselves, there ARE gender differences both physically and mentally, and i am not going to deny that these differences exist for the sake of some kind of over bearing disproportionate political correctness, and having to tip toe when people are over sensitive and over reactive about the slightest thing. I feel you are unable to comprehend the whole ‘banter’ thing, certainly as it was meant, so i will not waste any time trying to quantify it, but i know what i meant, as i’m sure many do, and this is not a thing i made up myself, this is something that has been mirrored and mentioned on a few sites when discussing the movie, by the site writers themselves, so its not just me that gets or has mentioned the whole lacking banter the series is synonymous for thing.

            Oh, and i am very ‘light’ thank you, i even took your long reply time with humour when a lot would have picked an argument with that. It could be argued that it is you that is taking this very seriously and being extremely touchy, with accusations with misogyny and sexism, merely because someone said that a film would have been better with a male cast, in roles that were associated with males, despite your own admission that females did seem to be used for the sake of using female, another contradiction to your whole argument, along with admitting yourself that you wouldn’t be happy if Ripley was cast to a man, which is the exact same thing i was saying here about the Ghostbusters team. and because of these glaring contradictions, your pro-female gender agenda for the sake of it is all too apparent.

            You “I agree that they did the all female cast just to mix things up, just for the heck of it – but fanboys aside, who cares?”

            Ummmm… just about everyone?! Lol Fanboys aside even, fanboys are a vast majority of the people that like a given thing anyway, so i’d say that’s significant and the last group that should be ignored, which was illustrated buy the poor reception and takings this film took, its actually LOST money, not good is it, no matter how you try to spin it.

            You may accept most(emphasis on ‘most’), of the roles being offered to the other gender from the examples i gave. but that doesn’t mean other men or women might, and you don’t speak for everyone, and you say you would have trouble accepting a male Ripley, well there you go! you can’t have it both ways, you see my point or you don’t, and where i found one example of a change of gender casting, i’m sure i could find plenty of others you might not like given either given time and more examples, i mean it took only a few examples offered by me, for you to find one and contradict your whole argument here..

            I will concede that gender roles in Hollywood can be sum what of a template, but bucking the trend and trying something different in that regard does not automatically mean that its going to be good, just because its bucking a trend or trying something different, like i say, some roles are just better when its a certain gender, that’s not sexism, that’s just reality, just like in real life certain jobs seem very gender based, such as 99% of childcare jobs are women and most builders are men, is it sexist because that’s the way it is? who knows… my guess is that not many men apply tor childcare jobs and not many women train to be builders, which illustrates what i am saying in that there are gender differences and barriers in society, dare i say created by both men AND women,, there just is, and denying that isn’t going to really change that is it.

            As i said, the reception to this film speaks for itself and illustrates my point more perfectly than i could probably illustrate, at the end of the day, and the casting is one of the main things that’s mentioned for this, and i feel getting touchy about it and feeling put upon by someone saying that it doesn’t work with an all-female team isn’t going to change that basic reality, especially when what i said proved to be exactly right based on the overall and pretty decisive consensus.

            Whether you think i am being sexist in pointing out what was validated by the reception of the film, and also despite offering a view that mirrored what i said regarding an original female role yourself in your reply’s, is by the by, because none of any of that changes the fact that this film is ultimately considered to be pretty dire, and the bad casting choices is one of the main reasons cited for this.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Wow you are a sexiest. I thought am all women cast was a good move and they all worked great together. I’ve seen many women actors that were fabulous in their role but get nothing but put down well the men get all the credit. Sorry to say but a lot of Female actors are better then the men they share roles in the movie but of course it’s the man that gets all the credit. I love asp kinds of movies mostly horror. I thought that Ghostbusters was entertaining and funny. It’s not like it was asking to be an Oscar candidate. They took a different story approach which was the right thing to do. All these remakes just copy the old story instead of changing it up for the new generation. Why watch the remake when I can watch the original because there are no changing except for CGI. Ghostbusters was a different take then the original. Just like I said it had no intention of saying were going to the Oscars. It was about having fun. All the women work well together and it was humorous. So get off your high horse. What do you think you are a movie critic. Do you get paid for this Ssdi called job and you are a sexiest.

          • Spartas Edge

            I have so much to say in reply to what you just said, that i feel spoilt for choice on where to start..lol

            Okay, where to begin…I completely disagree with everything you just came out with lol, especially the sexist part, and i will tell you why.

            It is not sexist to speak the truth about how bad a film is and why it is bad, especially when just about everyone has echoed the same things and the same reasons, and its not sexist to have the opinion that a film didn’t work because of the choice of actors/actresses, its a completely valid critique, but in this case the casting is ONE of the things that made it as bad as it is, so spare me the defensive sexist rhetoric because your embarrassing yourself lol All your proving is that crap rubbish should be defended and is justified just because the cast was women? please.. its you that’s showing that your not thinking clearly and are clearly swayed and bias by gender agendas because they happen to be women, which is even worse than anything you have accused me of, in short, its a misplaced and misused defence, because the consensus is is that this in fact abysmal for many reasons, the casting being one of those reasons, and all you’ve accomplished by your over defensive misplaced reaction and stance of some sort of attack on women and reply to Katara, is to prove that you have a truly awful taste in movies and are completely blind when you think your gender has been negatively mentioned LOL. The fact you think the casting was a good choice and they worked well together show your huge lack of judgement and taste as far as most people would be concerned, based on the majority of feedback to this film and its LOSS, i’ll repeat that, LOSS of money rather than profit lol

            The fact that you talk about how ‘all these female actresses are better than men but don’t get the credit’ only serves to illustrate your bias towards the female gender, and your statement itself is no less better and no less sexist then the very accusation you yourself are branding, which is outrageous.

            Just because Ghostbusters ‘was not asking for an oscar’ does not make it a bad film sure, but that doesn’t make it a good one either, and is no excuse for how terrible it was either, and it is not a get out of jail free card for a film to be terrible, and from the critical and public reaction, people did not seem to have the opinion ‘it was fun’, but in fact the general consensus when they came away is that its pretty awful with terrible writing and flat comedy, and you just seem to be making excuses for it at this point because ‘its an all-female team’ rather than offering actual, ket alone compelling reasons to back up why youbthought it was a good film, which speaks volumes. The film doesn’t even seem to know what it is, it doesn’t know if its a sequel or a reboot lol yes, the scripting is THAT bad.. they reference the previous films, yet have actors from said films playing completely different people, in a poor attemt to be liked off those films greatness, and the comedy was as flat as a pancake, as was the caricature cartoon characterising of the main characters in this new one. There are various reasons why this film bombed so badly, (and lets not kid ourselves, its well publicised it just just that) the writing, the way it was shot, and yes the casting, and you are in the vast minority if you think this film is anywhere near good lol, but hey, don’t take my work for it, go out there and look at the opinions and reviews, and look at the fact that the film actually lost money, you can’t argue with the cold hard number, though i’m sure you will probably try lol because ‘its an female cast’ and therefore cannot and should not be criticised.. oh dear… that is so not the reason to defend this universally acknowledged pile of tripe.. Everyone has already pretty much forgotten about the film, certainly no-ones talking about it apart from you, hell they’re probably trying to forget it exists!..

            You are a huge hypocrite. You cry sexism, yet exhibit anti men sexism yourself, talk about high horses yet clearly ride your own, and question my right to review the film then proceed to review it yourself, how does THAT work!? lol Your so hypocritical its comedic, so you can review something, but anyone who doesn’t happen to share YOUR (minority) opinion can’t? i’m sorry, but its you that clearly needs to dismount your high horse, because it doesn’t work like that just because you say it does i’m afraid lol..

            So as i say, i completely disagree with everything you said and therfore beg to differ with your clearly bias and questionable views and misplaced keen’ness to drop labels, and like most people i also disagree with you on your praise of this god awful travesty of a film for many credible reasons lol

            Oh, your clearly sexist and bias, it evident through your reply. Some people are so quick to cry victim, and with such people, its often a misplaced and knee-jerk one, and this is one such example, i’m tempted to “say grow up and get a decent taste in films while your at it”.. what do you know, i just did..lol

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Go on and on and on and on no I am not a radical feminist but I do believe that women deserve to be equal to men deserve equal rights at with wages and they do not receive the respect as a man does all about the movie was just to have fun a remake for the new generation and the casted worked well together they were all funny they all got along and it’s just about having fun and that’s it I enjoyed many different kinds of new movies from Drama Action horror entertainment Schindler’s List was a very good movie it was very sad but it was also an awesome movie Shawshank Redemption another awesome movie movie there’s a lot of comedies out there that people don’t care for because it’s either volgarr or they just don’t understand the lingo but that doesn’t mean that it’s a bad movie either every movie deserves a chance and not just because so many people didn’t like it just cuz the people that do like it doesn’t make them any different like I said I like all kinds of music I mean movies I don’t condemn male actors I think there a lot of good male actors and female actors however the females do not get the recognition or the pay that men do and how fair is that it’s not very fair at all so no I am not riding a high horse I am just trying to get women the acknowledgement of equal pay and equal acknowledgement that men get

          • Paul Chach Mcarthy

            I just down voted all your comments because I am an unashamed misogynist, so sue me.

          • Spartas Edge

            Maybe someone one day will do exactly that.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            I totally agree with you. I really liked the movie and found out refreshing to have and all women cast. I think people were thinking that it was going to be like the original but that is not the way it goes. This was a new take off the movie. I think all the characters worked well together. Those that say it was a mistake to have an all women cast are just women haters. There ate a lot of women that are great actors many better then men. So get over it you sexiest pigs. Then Movie was entertaining and funny and I hope they make part 2

          • Spartas Edge

            You clearly have an abysmal taste in films, even by some miracle and i loss all sense of judgement and liked this pile of shite for some bizzarre reason, i wouldn’tactually dare admit it openly, much less try to defend it lol. As for your so far poorly founded accusations of sexism, i could level the same accusations to you, and i go into detail why in my response above. Poor casting wasn’t the only reason this film is terrible, there are other reasons also, which i also cover above. You accusations of sexism lack any kind of substance, validity and worse of all, explanation, you show signs of a textbook radical feminist, quick to rant and play the victim, but with no basis for said rant or credible or well explained views to back up your misplaced accusations of victimisation lol If you want me to pull your already poor argument apart? by all means keep going, and i will be happy to oblige, people like you rarely have any credible points to push and back up your claims, you sad woman.. Sexist pigs? seriously? are you actually for real? get a life.. stuff like this is sooo old, desperate and pathetic.. People just roll their eyes at people like you when you crawl out from under your rock nowadays, and i’m very sure that like others like you, people who seem to love playing the victim and look for any vague desperate opportunity to do so, can’t even see how tired people are of tiresome people like you, go cry wolf somewhere else, because there is no wolf here lol, certainly no-one who is willing to divulge you in your paranoid unfounded delusions. It probably hasn’t even OCCURRED to you that this new Ghostbusters is simply just an awful film and the vast majority and loss of money has got it all wrong Lol, no, of course it hasn’t, you are too concerned with wedging in other agendas your clearly obsessed with, well go try play victim and take your misplaced agendas somewhere else, as i have no interested in your petty insecurities.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Oh please grow up I do not call myself a victim even when I was a victim but you on the other hand show your true colors so I will obviously oblige you you sad little man I also have no insecurities I believe every movie should have a chance and every actor should have a chance to act some can do it some can’t but regardless they go out there and they try this movie was just for fun entertainment it was not like they were asking to be nominated for an Oscar so wake the f****** you f****** woman-hater

          • Spartas Edge

            Ah, so you do want to keep going, marvellous! rubs hands in glee lol

            Now your just throwing everything i said to you back at me, such as ‘grow up’, ‘sad little man’ (i basically said the equivalent to you), seriously, can you not think of your own things to say? lol I don’t care if you deny it, you CLEARLY have insecurities, your put upon yet poorly backed up post itself is exhibit A, B, C and D lol but if you want a precise reference and example, your misplaced accusations of sexism is playing the victim, as is your unconditional defence of the poor casting, because they happen to be women, citing critisim of them as sexist when it just simply didn’t work, which was echoed by the majoritys reaction to the film.

            As i said previously (can you actually read?), saying ‘its not after an oscar’ does not excuse or exonerate this terrible film, and many (judging from its reaction and performance) would argue that it was not fun at all, it was crap, but in your inappropriately used victim playing man hating extremist feminist with a poor taste in films, would rather close your eyes and say la la la la to all that and make it to be something it isnt lol.

            One last point, i feel i need to re-iterate this encase you didn’t see it before (frankly i can’t emphasise this enough lol) but you do realise this movie lost money right? Encase you wasn’t aware, this is a very bad thing, as they are supposed to make a profit, not a loss.. Is this not a big enough clue to you as to how bad this film is for its various reasons? No, of course it doesn’t, your too blinded by agendas, hence your judgement is ultimately clouded and bias, and therfore completely devoid of merit.

            And just to put you straight, i don’t ‘hate women’, have no reason what so ever to ‘hate women’, so your sounding a bit hysterical and over reactionary there.. in fact i don’t pre judge or generalise people because of their gender, i judge ‘people’ as individuals, and judge individuals as they come and how they conduct themselves be it man or woman, and if you continue to press the ‘sexist pig’ route, you will leave me no choice but to press you a lot harder on why you said that and to justify and back up your reasoning for saying it, and by that i mean with credible reasons, not just because i thought it was a bad casting choice for this movie (a statment that was ultimately proved right by how terrible it was and its poor reception and performance).

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Sorry to say that I am not a radical feminist do I believe that women should be equal to men yes I do should they make equal pay yes I do take for instance a cardiologist specialist they make $10,000 less than a man and they do the same job sometimes even better so how is that fair it’s not fair at all and it’s not fair knocking people down for doing something that they enjoy

          • Spartas Edge

            Saying it does not make it so, and all i can say is from what you have said, is that you certainly come across like one. As the saying goes, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck, and that is how it appears anyway..

            I’m sorry? i thought we was talking about Ghostbusters here :/

            Things often go both ways, women do well in and get paid a lot more for clerical jobs then men do in the more male orientated manual jobs, how is THAT fair? and how about child custody cases, where the vast majority of women get custody of children, how is that fair? My point is, that gender based injustices goes both ways sonlets not pretend it only happens to women because it doesn’t, however, two wrongs don’t make a right, to which i would hope you would agree.

            Women get things paid for them in accepted and in many cases expected social behaviour, be it drinks, dates, cinema tickets, shopping, gifts etc.. Now before you say “not all women are like that” i agree, but a lot of women don’t turn these things down either and in fact expect them, how is THAT equal? Its like they demand equality on one hand, and expect certain special treatment on the other, and that is sum-what of a contradiction wouldn’t you say. As i said, not all women expect these things, just as not all men are the same, do you see where i’m coming from? My point is, sexism and broad generalisations towards the opposite genders, goes both ways and women are just as capable of man hating and generalising all men, which is no better.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Yes I do agree that there are men haters out there and for women like that I have no respect for I don’t think that it’s right I think everybody should be treated with respect but unfortunately our world the way it is just not allow that and I do agree to wrongs don’t make a right I wish we can make this world a happier place where everybody gets treated equally and unfortunately that’s just not the way things are going and sometimes just a stupid silly movie can make you forget about that just for a little while now that’s all I’m trying to say it doesn’t have to be a good move it doesn’t have to be an Oscar movie but just something to laugh at even if it’s dumb makes you forget about what is going on in this world the least for a little while

          • Spartas Edge

            On the same token, i concede that there are male misogynists out there and that women are often treated patronisingly and/as sexual objects, and i am not one of those people. While i of course admit that i find women attractive, as a man, which is nature, i also respect that they are human beings with thoughts and feelings just the same and are entitled to the same rights as human beings, and i deplore these cultures that treat women like second class citizens to outright cattle, those cultures need to come out of the middle ages frankly, its 2017… and not being a female, i concede i don’t experience what women do in terms of treatment and the way they are spoken to by misogynistic types, what i am saying, is that there are also injustices against men, and at the moment especially, it feels like it’s open season on all white men (or ‘white privalaged men’ as seems to be the phrase used by some, which somehow implies white men are privileged because of what they are, but that is unfair to say one is privileged because of ones colour and gender, white men can have s****y lives the same as anyone else, which is why there is a high suicide rate in that demographic, but we are all individuals after all..

            Back to the film, don’t get me wrong, i like a dumb action film as much as the next person, but what i am trying to get at, is just because a film is smart and pretentious, doesn’t make it good, it may be good but it may also be bad, personally most of these oscar nominated films, i have no interest in watching, most of them seem like pretentious twaddle to me that only seem to exist to chase oscars, but the same applies to dumb fun movies, in that being dumb doesn’t make it bad and it also doesn’t make it good by default, being a type of film has no bearing on whether a film is good or not and doesn’t give it a licence to be bad either, so that has no relevance. Whether a film is good or not is down to many other factors, such as is it well written and directed, is it funny(if its a comedy), is it entertaining and does the plot make sense,is the casting good, is the music good, and was it well made on the whole.. So many factors can make or break a film, its not decided on whether its a dumb film or not, that’s what i’m saying.

            You say you found the new Ghostbusters entertaining, which is great, for you, and that’s all that should matter to you, but it can’t be ignored that people that did think this film was good are in the vast minority, with the majority not liking it, expressing that the casting was for the sake of casting and a generally poor choice, cartoon like caricature over the top characters, poor music, poor direction, flat writing and comedy and a lot of it not making any sense in terms that it can’t even decide if its a sequel or reboot, and these i feel are all valid criticisms. While its great that some people enjoyed the film, its not so good that most people didn’t think much of it with so many issues with it, and no matter how we look at it, it is not good that the film actually lost money, that can’t be good for the company(in this case Sony)that made it, as a products main purpose is to make money, not lose it. Simply put, the film was a huge disappointment to fans of the previous films, and was not what they expected or wanted, and that’s not good for the majority of the fans, which in turn was not good for the film company which ended up losing money, which kind of sums the whole situation up.

          • Minimal. So alluring.

          • Spartas Edge

            “Minimal. So alluring”

            Explain.

          • Katara c.

            Yeah, I feel like, there’s reasonable criticism & unreasonable criticism. Like I said, I can understand why huge fans of the original series would be upset by the changes – die-hard fans tend to not like drastic changes or erasures of the stories & characters they love 😛 Personally, I’m a die-hard mega-fan of Avatar: The Last Airbender. Have you seen that series, and then seen the movie The Last Airbender? Monkeys could pull better scripting & casting out of their butts than what we got in that movie. If anyone knows the pain of having beloved characters & stories totally messed with & ruined, it’s me. I also get the annoyance at all these constant movie franchise reboots. I see those criticisms as totally valid, and I won’t argue them.

            But I see the Ghostbusters 2016 as being more like Legend of Korra. It has the same themes, but new stories, new characters. It can be weird to get used to, and you can love, like, or hate the choices they make in the stories, the casting, the characters. But hating it just cos those characters are women, and for no other reason? Crazy. They’re not taking beloved characters & changing them – this is not female Thor or gay black Spiderman (or male Ripley, like he says). These are totally new characters set in a new story arc that’s based on an old, popular franchise.

            And it boggles my mind how he can’t see how sexist he is. All his replies are full of stereotypes of men & women. I think I must’ve called it when I said he doesn’t know any women, and maybe now he’s all butthurt about it.

        • snowdog

          When I make chili, I don’t add peaches. Nothing against peaches, just doesn’t work in chili.

          • Spartas Edge

            I love that analogy 🙂

    • Jürgen Erhard

      Lesson: if you do a remake, you do so because you’re eyeing the built-in fanbase.

      Corollary lesson: if you want to exploit the built-in fanbase, do *NOT* do your utmost to fuck off this built-in fanbase. Because duh.

      • Spartas Edge

        Well said.

  • M_In_O_Town

    Lesson; Reboots suck

    Not a misogynist just anti reboot

    • And keep in mind that Hollywood once had plans on doing a remake of Brandon Lee´s “The Crow”…

      • Nanya

        Only if they get Wrestling Legend Sting.

        • M_In_O_Town

          Again grew out of cartoons years ago

      • Power rangers is being rebooted and so is kickboxer and bloodsport

        • Graham Strouse

          Please Lord, no….and I only like Power Rangers because of Amy Jo Johnson…

      • Graham Strouse

        They did at least one sequel to The Crow…I fucking hated it. And I loved the first movie so much.

        • wirth6

          They actually had no less than 3 sequels to The Crow (City of Angels, Salvation, and Wicked Prayer). There was even a tv series in 1998 (Stairway to Heaven). What I’ve seen from those was horrible.

          • Graham Strouse

            I thought there was more than one, but I wasn’t sure. I tuned out after the first happened. The original was so damned good and probably the best ’90s sound track ever. Doing sequels, particularly after Brandon Lee’s death, just seemed sacrilegious to me.

        • I had no idea about that? Then again, I do recall that there existed two “The Crow” games. So that makes perfect sense I guess.

          • Graham Strouse

            I was 21 and in college during the ’90s when the first movie came out. So I have a bit of an emotional investment. I also think that doing a new Crow is pretty fucking disrespectful to the memory of Brandon Lee and his family.

          • Ah, I was about 14 years old when I saw the first movie. And the movie rocked my world pretty much. I bet 😉 Yes. I even recall that Bruce Lee´s wife made a statement about it when the movie became publicly known?

          • Graham Strouse

            Still love the movie.

          • So do I…I was talking about Hollywood´s plans on making a remake of the first movie.

          • Graham Strouse

            Also, I don’t care how old you are, that was an epic soundtrack…

          • Well, I only wanted to point out how old I was at the time. Yes, it´s a really good soundtrack.

    • Conner Garry Sennett

      Reboots aren’t necessarily bad. There’s good ones and bad ones. This happened to be bad. A good one is the new Voltron cartoon.

      • M_In_O_Town

        Grew out of cartoons years ago thanks

        • Conner Garry Sennett

          It took gaming awhile to escape the idea it was just for kids. Seems as if cartoons are still fighting that battle. You should still consider checking out at least an episode. It’s worked on by the same people behind The Legend of Korra and is on Netflix already with a season 2 announced.

    • Katara c.

      Yeah, I think a lot of people are getting burned out on reboots….

  • Kirk Hilles

    The problem is the budget. It should’ve been a $50 million budget in which case they are profitable. It markets itself and SNL characters can’t demand high paychecks (except for Melissa I guess). I’m sure it’s a good movie, bit that’s not good enough for us to spend what little we have on something that can wait for Redbox. If it doesn’t get your heart pumping in the trailer, why rush to see it?

  • Johny Johnson

    Actually, it needs to make closer to $400 million to break even. It will lose Sony somewhere between $150 million and $200 million. It’s one of the biggest flops since The Lone Ranger.

    As of the 2 week mark, this film has made $130 million worldwide ($94 mil dom / $36 mil int’l). The “break even” number (according to many media sources) is between $375 million – $400 million. Now, how is this estimate derived? Well, I will try my best to explain.

    Production on the film was $144 million. Marketing/advertising/distribution was roughly $150 million (which brings it to around $300 million). A film doesn’t get all the box office receipts – it is usually between 1/2 and 2/3 of a box office domestically. So, if a film makes say $200 million at the box office, the company actually takes in somewhere between $100 million and $135 million depending on the length of its run, etc. So, taking all that into account, to break even, this movie needs to make back the $290 million they have put into it (production+marketing+ads+distribution). Under the high end 2/3 box office ratio, that means it would need to $435 million worldwide box office to break even. Under the 1/2 box office ration, it would need to make $580 million to recoup its costs. The middle figure for the 1/2 to 2/3 is just north of $500 million Now, they will obviously get some money from merchandising and DVD sales. A legitimate estimate for that would be around $100 million. Which would put the necessary box office take to break even at $400 million:

    Production+marketing+advertising+distribution = $290 million
    To break even box office under the 1/2 – 2/3 rule = roughly $500 million
    Minus the profits from merchandising/DVD sales = around $100 million
    Worldwide box office to break even = around $400 million

    So, right now it is at $130 million worldwide and poised to be in 8th place in this weekend’s box office (according to BoxOfficeMojo). This thing may top out around $200 million worldwide – which would put it about $200 million short of what it needs just to break even. So, another monster loss for Sony and one of the biggest busts in recent memory.

    • popo123

      It barely opened to markets overseas. How the hell is it only going to get $200 WORLDWIDE? It will be go past $150 WW this weekend and still has Korea, Japan, Mexico, Spain, France and Germany left with millions of dollars till going to be added on its existing markets. $200m Lifetime gross is pure BAD box office prediction.

      • helicopter

        Ghostbusters aint one of those films that youll be dying to see in a big screen and there are already numerous illegal streaming sites that stream the movie on the net for free.

        Review-wise, its pretty much mediocre. The only critics that gave it (suspiciously) high ratings are the (obviously) pro liberal journalists who call any people who hate the movie as sexists trolls and had the Bechdel Test as a part of their criterias.

        • Arturo Rivera

          Wasn’t the Bechdel Test just a joke?

          • GunbladeKnight

            It was, so much so that apparently the originator has distanced themselves from it. Not to mention that most “feminist” films fail it anyways, and the last big movie I can remember passing it (Mad Max) basically showed women as inept, stupid, and wasteful.

          • Arturo Rivera

            I am this close to losing my patience in humanity if they can base their opinions on a passing joke. Allison Bechdel might as well apologize for even starting it. They may be spinning this as a success, for now, but little after a year? They’ll be dropping the damn thing like a hot potato. Even the advertising here has doubled (I live in the Philippines) back-to-back nonstop just to make up for the last days.

          • Arturo Rivera

            It’s at 135 million from just today. It flopped. Why? Because everything about it, down to the marketing, was egregiously expensive. They’re gonna be wanting to get those numbers back. It doesn’t matter if the theatre wasn’t completely empty. It’s gone down the rankings, gradually farther for each passing day because of other, better titles worth seeing. It’s literally failed at what the first and original movie had accomplished in the first week of its release alone.

            Beat everything else out at the box office and claim the number one spot.

          • El_Fez

            That test is such a joke. A movie like Das Boot or The Great Escape fail because there are no females in those settings, but Friday the 13th IV passes with flying colors because they talk about non-man subjects in-between getting savagely butchered by Jason? And one supports women in cinema while the other doesn’t?

          • Arturo Rivera

            Good news. The film has busted. It’s a failure, a flop. Reality has settled the dust, and the cucks have migrated. Want to know something else? A very interesting experiment I conducted. I googled “Ghostbusters greatest movie”. The top results? The 1987 blockbuster hit. NOT the reboot.

            Watch out, I’m about to give birth to a meme, share it.

            Ghostbusters 2016 the greatest movie of 2016 – said by no one, ever.

          • Katara c.

            Believe it or not, having an all-female lead cast is not feminist conspiracy stuff. I’m the last person you’ll see on the PC bandwagon, but honestly I can’t see how you could call this movie feminist. It has female leads, yes, but they’re doing the same stuff any male lead would do, so what’s the problem? I heard some say it was man-hating cos the men were all “bad guys”, incompetent, or ditzy, but it doesn’t hold up for most of the guys, except for 2. Wiig’s boyfriend was a jerk, but the other more antagonistic guys (eg. the uni head, the delivery guy, the villain) would’ve behaved the same as they did if it were men in the leads – their behaviour wouldn’t change at all in relation to the leads. The only obvious “gender stereotype flip” was Kevin, but I found it pretty funny how ditzy he was, and the execution of the eye-candy jokes made it funny – and it would’ve been funny if the genders were swapped. Honestly, if it had been a lady being that ditzy any criticism would’ve been labelled PC, but when it’s a guy, everyone says its man-hating feminist garbage. Seems like 2 sides of the same coin to me.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Wow what a freakin, sexiest idiot you are. Just by the way you talk you sound like a controlling women beater. that’s if you do women at all

        • DM Duty

          its not pro liberal journalist. Its anyone who can see that the movie flopped because of sexism. It was said 3 months before the movie it would flop. There was social media sites refusing to see the movie, signing petitions 3 months before the movie even launched, and even close to a year out from the first trailer.. Their reason? Women cant be the lead role, it would ruin the series. Not the director, not the special effects, not the story, women could not play the lead role… nothing more, nothing less. That sexism led into the release. People refused to see it on the premise that they would not enjoy it because it had women in it as the lead. Memes were produced. If it was men in the lead, they would love it and gobble it up. But because its women they will pass. Compact that with a society already on edge because of politics etc…… So yah sexim ruined this movies chances and those journalist are smart enough to see that.

          • helicopter

            LOL thats a stupid premise.

            The Ghostbusters franchise already have female characters and nobody complains about them, hell in fact fans love them because they enriched the canon.

            Of course ignorant idiots like you, who pretends to understand the issue, dont even know that fact.

            Try again.

          • RMFan4Life

            You my friend are a flat out retard.
            While is true that a lot of people hated the idea of all female cast for ghost busters it really has nothing to do with Mysoginy, Patriarchy or other bs you retards seem to call upon. Is simply that people would like more if the essence of a movie would stay the same rather than turn it up on its head.

            Furthermore if anything this movie is sexist in the opposite direction. Sexism is not a one way street asshole and if a movie would’ve been released with the same lines, same tropes, same villain etc but with all females as males and all males as females you bet every retard like you would’ve been fuming with anger.

            So not only is it not mysoginy to not like this movie but is actually going for political correctness not to like a movie which is sexist against man retard.

            Furthermore as far as swapping gender, race or whatever else for a character and people not like it, it really has nothing to do with racism or sexism. I wouldn’t want to see Blade as a white dude and I don’t want to see Superman as a black dude. Same way I don’t want to see a movie with Wonder Man replacing Wonder Women. Is simply just preferring the original idea rather than a twisted “vision” meant for political manipulation.

            You and your kind or so blind is really stupid if you believe everything is sexist or racist and the fact that YOU ARE ACTUALLY UNABLE to see how sexist against men this movie is both amuses and amazes me of how retarded some you can be.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            Wow you are a rude person to call people retards, idiots, and asshole. Do you know to speaks without people down or ous your English that bad.

          • RMFan4Life

            lol, you trying to criticize my english (which was actually pretty good) while u can’t even write a simple sentence is beyond hilarious xD.

            I think what you meant to say was “do you even know how to speak without putting people down or is your english that bad”. That would be one correct way of writing that sentence. If you try to be a smartass at least do it properly and not make a fool out of yourself.

          • Flop

            By your logic, the resident evil series should have ended after the first film, same as tomb raider(which would have failed after its first game because that’s a woman in a game as well), bridesmaids, the heat, breakfast at Tiffany’s, gone with the wind, hell even Lucille Ball is considered a failure in your eyes because America is sexist and refused to acknowledge someone as successful as Lucille(whom you have no idea who that even is without google). Movies, tv, video games, etc. have all had successful female led roles.

            Ghostbusters flopped because the stupidity of the cast, the crew, the production company, THE DIRECTOR called anyone that said anything negative about ghostbusters a misogynist. People go to the movies to enjoy themselves outside of real life. Everyone is already sick and tired of feminazis and SJW’s, the last thing anybody wants to deal with in any entertainment is feminazis and SJW’s.

            P.S. Less than 1% of the comments on the YouTube trailer(the one that is ranked 9 on most disliked video in YouTube history) were actually misogynistic.

            That’s like saying every white male is a rapist because Brock turner is a rapist.
            Every black man is a criminal because Michael Brown.
            Every Mexican is illegal.
            Every Muslim is a terrorist.
            Every police officer just wants to kill minorities.

            Do you see how stupid it is compare the select few with the vast majority? Why is it ok to say everyone is sexist because the new ghostbusters had a very insignificant amount of sexist/misogynistic comments on it?

          • Katara c.

            They’re not saying that *all* movies are sexist. They’re saying that the success of this one particular movie was undermined due to sexism… and it was. Seriously, it doesn’t take some narcissistic SJW to see that if the main criticism is female leads, with no rationale given as to *why* that’s bad, and people have such ire and such expectations of Feminazism that they’re signing petitions and panning the movie *before it’s even released*…. then that’s pretty sexist. I’m no fan of PC or SJWs (actually I rather despise all that), but sometimes you just have to call a spade a spade.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            That’s right

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            What are you smoking?

          • Katara c.

            Agreed. I half-expected the charges of sexism in the fan base to be overblown (the main thing keeping me from *fully* expecting it was that a movie preview I saw seemed alright, but even then I just chalked the rage up to fanboys who could never think anything was as good as the original). But after seeing it – and thinking it was actually pretty good – for the first time I’m actually agreeing with the notion that sexism stopped its success. It’s pretty sad.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            I totally agree with you.

      • Johny Johnson

        It’s on life support domestically after this weekend. And those countries you mention will probably contribute about $15 million total to it. So, $200 million is pretty close to where it will top out. But, if you feel better about it, let’s give it $215 million ww box office. Then it’s only $185 million flop.

        • popo123

          Wow you’re really bad at box office predictions. Whatever you say, dude.

          • Daltos

            To quote the person several comments below me who was willing to do the math.

            “Looks like you are the idiot here

            Ghostbusters production cost amount to $144,000,000, its marketing, another $100,000,000… a total of $244,000,000.

            Your
            $135,000,000 figure is a worldwide gross which would mean that you have
            to factor in the cut that the theater operators will receive.
            Domestically, Sony will only take atleast 50% – 66% of the revenue,
            outside the US it could go down to only 30% – 40%

            50% of $135,000,000 is $67,500,000, thats not even a half of $144,000,000…. and way below $244,000,000 total cost.

            only a stupid ignorant idiot will not to realize such simple industry fact”

            Change the numbers as you please or as they update. Either way the closest they’ll get to a win is if they manage to break even.

          • popo123

            I’m not talking about whether the film will break even or flop. I’m talking about box office predictions; what numbers it will end up with. I’m purely saying that $200-$215m lifetime worldwide is an unrealistic prediction for this film.

          • Daltos

            Yeah, but those are usually up in the air. At least at first. Considering the amount they paid the actors it stands to reason that they’ll probably do a sequel. Their all-male GB has already been greenlit (Mostly sure) and the plan I think is to cross-over with them.

            The issue here is not how much they’ll get in the end as much as how quickly they get it. A lot of Sony execs and their investors are kind of shaken up about this. They’re going to want show at least some profit relatively soon or proof/trend that it will or else people will get cold feet, especially on a franchise reboot since it could place the whole effort in a negative light. And merch only goes so far for a movie that doesn’t do too well.

            But here’s to the male-version doing well. I’m not attached to GB or anything, but that doesn’t mean I want to see it fail as a whole.

          • Arturo Rivera

            The sequel is just an attempt at getting their numbers back. They’ve been in the dump before, so, they’re hardly discouraged. Unfortunately for Paul Fieg, they’re gonna have to let him flounder. Isn’t corporate megalomania fun?

          • Arturo Rivera

            Sigh, again, you’re not gonna be getting a doggy treat for defending this movie. It’s already been established by a LOT of people that it failed to live up to expectations and wasn’t all that good. It’s forgettable, at best.

          • Gamera Love

            the only oversea market that can change the situation is China but china is not a good place for a man hating movie and Japanese never favor these movies from the west. believe me most asian don’t like movie like this. i asked the theater staff, why Ghostbusters only in the theater for a week and they say that no one pay to see it. And here nobody talk about feminist. it’s just people say it’s not fun at all.

          • Arturo Rivera

            I knew it!

          • Kris Roberts

            China is a non-factor as the movie was banned from the country due to the ghost/undead aspect of the movie, so there’s an entire market that Sony will never be making money from. Honestly, they should have considered this when making predictions as undead-related media are taboo in China and have to be reworked/censored or just outright banned.

          • Raiken

            Well they can forget china because they won’t show movies with “realistic depictions of ghosts.”

          • Paul Chach Mcarthy

            This garbage was banned in China. They have some self respect.

          • Johny Johnson

            You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. You haven’t presented any counter numbers, so I will hit you with a few more.

            1) According to thenumbers.com “Ghostbusters landed in eighth place on Friday with $2.91 million, giving it a 15-day total of $99.28 million. It will earn close to $10 million over the weekend and will finish with $125 million”.

            Did you read that? One of the leading movie box office sites is saying Ghostbusters will finish with $125 million DOMESTICALLY.

            I am saying it will make $200-$215 million worldwide (which may even be a little high). That would give it between $75-$90 million internationally. That’s being kid without China in the picture and with the UK already having shown it.

            So, yeah, the $200-$215 worldwide box office still stands. If you have actual numbers to counter, I’d love to see them. But, more likely, you’re just gonna bang your high chair and proclaim “wrong, wrong, wrong, because I don’t want it to be that way”.

          • Toregilio Macapungay

            When BvS came out, many predicted that it won’t even reach a billion but the fanboys can’t accept it, having nothing but faith and the attitude to believed that the movie they thought was the best CBM of the time would easily cross the billion dollar mark, and yet, we knew what happened

          • Johny Johnson

            Actually it’s 100% realistic. Sure, it could bump to $220 million instead of $215 million. But, the fact is, this thing is gonna fall right in the $150 million to $200 million LOSS for Sony that I predicted.

          • Toronto Meel

            How are those box office numbers doing now bitchboy?

          • popo123

            How mature. My prediction remains.

          • imaginaryGHOST

            lol 179 million after 4 weeks, next week will be out of top 10 domestic. Only 4 counties left to open with ZERO big markets. Will bomb in Japan, might make 5 mil total in France, Belgium and Spain are DOA. This POS won’t even make it to 210 m worldwide. It’s in free-fall. Man, you are an idiot.

          • imaginaryGHOST

            I hope you see how big of an idiot you are now. STILL hasn’t cracked 200, and a chance it won’t ever. Lol 215 is impossible, overseas don’t care about this PC garbage at all hahahahahahah.

            You will never not be an idiot.

          • John Lord

            looks like he was right and your crybabying can’t change that

          • imaginaryGHOST

            lol, the movie may have reached a little higher, but only a little. it’s still a colossal box office BOMB, and your saltiness can’t change that.

          • Johny Johnson

            He’s not coming back – it’s doing even worse overseas than what we thought just a week ago.

            My guess is you’ll never hear from him again.
            — The Usual Suspects

          • John Lord

            way to make an ass of yourself. It’s over 220 and counting

          • John Lord

            the problem here with your numbers is you are WAAAAAY off on how much marketing they spent. The number was about 30million due to co-branding of products offsetting the cost (juice boxes, halloween candy, etc) and frankly that’s a high estimate. Sony’s released numbers making it profitable at 300mill would imply that it can’t be higher than 30m. More numbers released back it up. When sales were at about 200 and some random site came up with a new loss number of 70m sony released a statement saying that number was way too high as they had already passed that level at that time.

          • Arturo Rivera

            Take up a business workshop.

          • Johny Johnson

            Actually – it’s pretty on the money. But whatever helps you sleep at night.

          • Robert

            He’s right. No whatev’s…

          • Tex Dyess

            $182.2 million USD as of August 16th 2016. Yep… It’s a flop

          • eddie

            Looks like his box office prediction was pretty bang on dude. I think you are the one that is pretty bad at predictions.

          • popo123

            His original prediction of $200m which he later revised to $215 and $220m and then revised again to $208m has now been surpassed. It’s at $217m and will most likely finish at $225-230m. So in a way I must also concede that my prediction of $250m will now not happen anymore.

      • Judith Quinones

        Studio gets less than 50 percent from overseas grosses and tickets are cheaper overseas; maybe not Germany. I have been to movie theaters in Germany, South Korea and Colombia.

        • manuel hernandez

          I suppose you have to take into account exchange rates. For instance, besides the price of a movie ticket in Mexico, as I remember, is about $4 dollars. Whatever amount they make would have to be converted to dollars from pesos. Plus, I don’t think Mexicans will find four oddball women in suits appealing.

      • Johny Johnson

        You clearly have no clue what you are talking about. First off, you claim it has “barely opened to market overseas”. Really? Not sure what your definition of “barely” is. But, here are the countries where it has already opened: Argentina, Aruba, Australia, Bahrain, Brazil, Central America, Chile, Columbia, Curacao, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Finland, Ghana, Hong Kong, Iceland, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malayzia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Singapore, Suriname, Syria, Taiwan, Thailand, Trinidad, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Venezuela. It actually only has a few more territories to open. So, clearly you didn’t do any research before making your completely erroneous claim that it’s “barely opened to market overseas” when, in fact, it only has a few more countries to open to.
        Secondly, you haven’t presented any real counter numbers to my estimates, so I will hit you with a few more.
        ** According to thenumbers site: “Ghostbusters landed in eighth place on Friday with $2.91 million, giving it a 15-day total of $99.28 million. It will earn close to $10 million over the weekend and will finish with $125 million”.
        Did you read that? One of the leading movie box office sites is saying Ghostbusters will finish with $125 million DOMESTICALLY.
        ** I am saying it will make $200-$215 million worldwide (which may even be a little high). That would give it between $75-$90 million internationally (that’s $125 million + $75-$90 million = $200-$215 million if you’re bad at math). That’s being kind without China in the picture and with the UK already having shown it.
        ** So, yeah, the $200-$215 worldwide box office still stands. If you have actual numbers to counter, I’d love to see them. But, more likely, you’re just gonna bang your high chair and proclaim “wrong, wrong, wrong, because I don’t want it to be that way”.

        • popo123

          I’d love to see you actually have actual numbers to it’s lifetime gross but you actually don’t because you can’t. People tend to wait until a movie is released in all MAJOR markets before giving a confident and surefire prediction of a film’s lifetime numbers, but like you said “you’re just gonna bang your high chair and proclaim “wrong, wrong, wrong, because I don’t want it to be that way”.

          If it earns more than or exactly $100m at least overseas, which is still very probable then you’re already wrong, close but still wrong but if it doesn’t and it does indeed ends with just $200-$215m then sure, I will admit utter failure and defeat. Until then I will wait.

          • Johny Johnson

            No – people can predict numbers based on trends very easily. Right now it has $52 million international. The only countries left to release it are Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Japan, Spain, and France. That’s it. There is NO chance those countries combine for $50 million. NONE. How do I know this? Well, first off American comedies don’t perform very well overseas. Russia didn’t even get it to $3 million – and that’s one of the bigger int’l markets. Germany is likely the biggest of those markets – it will probably do around $8 million there if you look at how other films have done there this year. Denmark isn’t worth much – probably about $1.2 million at the high end. Belgium is a little higher in the $1.8-$2 million range. Japan has only had 8 American films break $10 million this year – and they are all action or animated. American comedies don’t sell there (in their top 84 films this year not a single one was an American comedy). So let’s give it $5 million just to be nice (though I can’t see it getting that high). Spain is a low market – probably in the $2.5 million – $3 million range. And, finally France has a bit more juice than Spain – probably $3.5 – $4 million. So, total that up, and we’re looking at somewhere in the neighborhood of $22 million – $23.2 million for the rest of those countries. The ones that have already shown in have $10 million or so left in its tank. So, when all is said and done, we are looking at somewhere in the neighborhood of $85 million ($52 million current + $23 million projected from final releases + $10 million more projected from current released countries). Which falls in line with my initial projection. Sure, it could get to $95 million instead of $90 million. And then you could claim “victory” I suppose because it made $220 million worldwide instead of my $215 million prediction, thereby shrinking its LOSSES from $185 million to ONLY $180 million. But, again, I initially said it would lose Sony between $150 million and $200 million. Based on its poor showing both domestically and internationally this weekend, it is headed straight for somewhere within that projection range.

            But I’ve provided you with a plethora of numbers, both current and predictive based on current numbers and trends. I’ve given you expansive reasons for all of my predictions, and it keeps headed towards those predictions. Yet you just say “wrong” without providing any real counter arguments. Because you have none. Because this movie has completely flopped. The fact that you can’t accept that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened. It has. This movie will not break $125 domestic. And it will probably not break $90 million international. And, it needs to recoup $400 million box office to break even. That is where it stands. You can keep fighting the numbers, but they don’t lie.

          • popo123

            A few points I’d like to point out:
            1. I don’t need to provide numbers. You already provided them. We only need math and actual numbers/estimates specially from markets the film hasn’t even been released at.
            2. No, the film definitely does not need $50 million more overseas because
            3. The film is STILL playing in all of the markets it has been released so far and has only been released this weekend in 2 major markets, too: Russia and Italy where it earned a combined ESTIMATED $3.7m.
            4. I think it will still be able to squeeze out at least $10 and at most $15 in the countries it has been released so far up to today(that’s Jul 31, 2016). So it definitely will not need $50 more to break $100m. – You did already mention this but still included that $50 million statement which doesn’t make any sense now in your comment.
            5. It still has Mexico(August 12) and South Korea(August 25) together with all those other countries you listed.
            6. There are major markets and smaller markets. Major markets are markets where films has the potential to earn millions or even breakout. Most, if not all of the remaining markets left are all major markets. The major markets it has been released so far are(Russia, Italy, UK, Brazil, and Australia. I might have missed one or two more).
            7. Box office gross is not the only means for the film to earn money. Like I said before(or probably in another comment somewhere here) it will most likely earn most of it’s money from Home release, TV, digital streaming and merchandise(where it’s toy line has so far been a success https://www.romper.com/p/mattel-says-ghostbusters-toy-sales-were-great-proving-gender-doesnt-make-a-toy-less-cool-15025)

            So for me I still predict it to break $100m overseas and Sony will most likely fudge it’s domestic numbers for it to reach $130m or something just like how it fudged Spectre’s numbers for it to reach $200m. I will wait until next week or next next weeks numbers to come in to have a clearer view of it’s possible gross but for now I’m sticking with it breaking $100m overseas. My overall BO prediction for this(as of now) is in the $250m or a couple million more.

          • helicopter

            relying on merchandises to bail a movie out from box office losses is pretty much an indication that the movie is a flop. Not to mention that toys, dvds, halloween costumes, etc will introduce their own production costs, royalty costs, marketing costs, logistics and utility costs, etc.

          • ElKonsolero

            Also Target had the Toys in clearence already two weeks before the movie was even shown in US cinemas. If the toys sell so well why does Target need to lower the prices?

          • Johny Johnson

            1. If you aren’t gonna provide numbers, then don’t dismiss mine as “unrealistic” when I actually provide support to back it up.
            2. Yes it does need to make $50 million more overseas to reach $100 million. It’s made $52 million so far – so it has about $50 million more to go.
            3. The markets it is already playing in will net it about $10 million more. I already stated that. It did horribly internationally this week. Did you know it was shown in the MOST territories (84) of all American films this week, yet it ranked 11th in international box office. That is abysmal. The Russia, UK, Italy, etc numbers are gonna fall off the map this week.
            4. I meant combined with the trickling numbers it will get from the rest – I laid out the math at the bottom.
            5. Mexico and South Korea? Those weren’t on the imdb list of releases. If you want to add another $4 million or so combined for those 2 ($3 mil for Mexico and $1 mil for South Korea), that brings the total then to around $89 million. So, I’ll adjust my international prediction from $75-$90 million to $80-95 million.
            6. It will have ZERO legs in Russia, Italy, UK, Brazil, etc. It did horribly this week internationally – it’s only going to get worse there.
            7. I hope you don’t really believe Sony’s spin that merchandise is doing well. They have provided NO raw numbers – only saying it’s done better than projected. Well, when you project next to nothing, it’s easy to exceed those expectations. All signs (like people going into stores and seeing no places for those toys or seeing them on clearance, etc) point to it doing minimally from a merchandise standpoint. However, I did include merchandise as part of the $100 million from DVD/Blu Ray/merchandise, etc.

            Even if your prediction of $250 million box office happened to be correct (which I don’t see possible unless China changes its mind), you are saying $150 million domestic / $100 million international. That means, Sony takes in roughly $90 million domestic / $40 million international of that box office. So, even at your HIGH END/PIE IN THE SKY estimate, this movie still does not even recoup its production costs ($144 million) with its worldwide box office ($130 million). And you still want to claim it’s not a flop?

          • popo123

            It will definitely earn more than $1m in Skorea. South Korea is a major market where films can earn upwards $100m(not saying GB will earn that, that’s impossible). Anyway what do you mean by $130m? It’s at an estimated $158m right now. Actuals may rise or fall. But like I said I will wait until estimates arrive for all the remaining numbers for a better look at all the possibilities.

          • Johny Johnson

            On the $130 million…

            You do realize that Sony does NOT take all the box office profits, correct? Domestically, it will take between 1/2 and 2/3 of the box office. So, under what I thought you were previously stating, $150 million domestic box office yields them between $75 million and $100 million – so I gave you a nice estimate with $90 million domestic (a little higher than midpoint). Internationally, Sony will take roughly 40% of the box office. So, if you are saying it will make $100 million domestically, Sony will take roughly $40 million. Add those 2 together, and you get $130 million, which is less than the $144 million production cost.

            You did state you thought it would make $250 million in your previous post (and it would make $100 international). So, I assumed you thought it would make $150 million domestic. But, if you’re saying it will make $130 million domestic and $100 million international, you’ve now lowered your projection to $230 million worldwide. That’s not so far off my “unrealistic” number I had of $200-$215 million. So I guess you are now seeing my numbers are going to be pretty close.

            Since you have lowered your projection, I’ll redo the box office TAKE math for Sony. Domestically, $130 million box office will yield Sony between $65 million and $87 million – midpoint for that is $76 million. International remains the same – $100 million yields Sony roughly $40 million. So they are looking at a box office TAKE (after the theaters get their cut) of about $116 million – which is almost $30 million LESS than their production budget of $144 million.

            As to South Korea, look at the box office list in South Korea and tell me where the first non-animated American comedy ranked there. I’ll help you out – it’s Dirty Grandpa. It ranked 90th, pulling in a little over $500,000. And, I still can’t find ANY release date for it in South Korea. Can you provide something that gives a date? I looked at IMDB’s South Korean releases, and it is not on there. I looked on the Ghostbusters wiki page, and South Korea is blank for a release date. That seems very strange to me.

          • Johny Johnson

            On the $130 million number –

            You do realize that Sony does NOT take all the box office profits, correct? Domestically, it will take between 1/2 and 2/3 of the box office. So, under what I thought you were previously stating, $150 million domestic box office yields them between $75 million and $100 million – so I gave you a nice estimate with $90 million domestic (a little higher than midpoint). Internationally, Sony will take roughly 40% of the box office. So, if you are saying it will make $100 million domestically, Sony will take roughly $40 million. Add those 2 together, and you get $130 million, which is less than the $144 million production cost.

            You did state before that you thought it would make $250 million (and that it would make $100 international). So, I assumed you thought it would make $150 million domestic to make that $250 worldwide total. But, if you’re saying it will make $130 million domestic and $100 million international, you’ve now lowered your projection to $230 million worldwide. That’s not so far off my “unrealistic” number I had of $200-$215 million. So I guess you are now seeing my numbers are going to be pretty close.

            Since you have lowered your projection, I’ll redo the box office TAKE math. Domestically, $130 million box office will yield between $65 million and $87 million – midpoint for that is $76 million. International remains the same – $100 million yields roughly $40 million. So they are looking at a box office take (after the theaters get their cut) of about $116 million – which is almost $30 million less than their production budget of $144 million. And, again, that doesn’t even begin to take into account the $150 million for the other stuff.

            As to S Kor, look at the box office list there and tell me where the first non-animated American comedy ranked there this year. I’ll help you out – it’s Dirty Grandpa. It ranked 90, pulling in a little over $500,000. And, I still can’t find a release date for it in S Kor. And I looked all over to try and find one. That seems very strange to me. Not saying it won’t happen, but you’d think something would show up.

          • Johny Johnson

            ok – my comment keeps getting deleted as spam for some unknown reason – so I will try and post in a series.

          • Johny Johnson

            PART 1

            Regarding the $130m number – you do realize that they do NOT take all the box office profits, right? Domestically it will take between 1/2 and 2/3 of the box office. So, under what I thought you were previously stating, $150m domestic box office yields them between $75m and $100m – so I gave a kind estimate with $90m domestic (a little higher than midpoint). Internationally, they will take roughly 40% of the box office. So, if you are saying it will make $100m internationally, they will take roughly $40m. Add those 2 together, and you get $130m – which is less than the $144m production cost.

          • Johny Johnson

            PART 2

            You did state at the end of your previous post that you thought it would make $250m (and that it would make $100m international). So, I assumed you thought it would make $150m domestic to make that $250m ww total. But, if you’re saying it will make $130m domestic and $100m international, you’ve now lowered your projection to $230m worldwide. That’s not so far off my number I had of $200-$215m. So I guess you are now seeing my numbers are going to be pretty close.

          • Johny Johnson

            PART 3

            Since you have lowered your projection, I’ll redo the box office TAKE math. Domestically, $130m box office will yield between $65m and $87m – midpoint for that is $76m. International remains the same – $100m yields roughly $40m. So they are looking at a box office take (after the theaters get theirs) of about $116m – which is almost $30m less than their production budget of $144m. And, again, that doesn’t even begin to take into account the $150m for the other stuff (ie marketing, distribution, etc).

          • Johny Johnson

            PART 4 (LAST)

            As to South Korea, look at the box office list there and tell me where the first non-animated American comedy ranked there this year. I’ll help you out – it’s Dirty Grandpa. It ranked 90, pulling in a little over $500,000. And, I still can’t find a release date for it in South Korea – I looked on the GB w i ki a as well as I M D B site. That seems very strange to me. Not saying it won’t happen, but you’d think something would show up somewhere.

          • popo123

            They don’t have it on IMDB. I think Deadline reported on it and you can check kobis.or.kr for official box office reports in South Korea. They report everything, from release dates,seats, admissions, screens(they have individual charts for 3d, 4dx, and all the different kinds of cinemas), pre-sales, indie films, and even overseas box office gross. Anyway the difference between normal comedies and GB is that GB is also a sci-fi comedy which has lots of CGI action and effects and in 3D which tends to do better in South Korea. Pixels did $4.7m in SK for example(and it was received way worse). So I think it would probably do a bit better than pixels like around $5m or maybe about the same.

          • Johny Johnson

            Well, we will see. The Heat didn’t even show in South Korea, and Bridesmaids made less than $500,000. So I don’t know how well known Feig or the cast is there. Regardless, if you’re counting on South Korea to be the salvation for this movie – and by “salvation” I mean the difference between losing $140 million or $135 million, then it doesn’t really matter.

          • popo123

            I’m not counting at all at SK nor regarding it as the films probable salvation. I’m just stating all the possible markets it might get enough money for the film to break $100m overseas. That’s all.

          • Johny Johnson

            Well you started by stating that it’s not a flop and that it’s already made its budget back – both of which are incorrect. So I don’t know what you’re really trying to argue at this point. Will $100m overseas instead of $90m make any difference? It’s still a massive flop regardless.

          • popo123

            I argued about your box office predictions and not really whether it will be a flop or not. I think you’re referring to another comment of mine in this article that is not included in this discussion, as in not included in the replies on your original comment.

          • popo123

            I’m predicting $120m internationally, not $100m.
            “Oh and I am talking about roughly $130m domestically and around $120m or more internationally.”

          • Johny Johnson

            okay – so you changed your figures again and edited your previous post. that’s fine – but don’t try to pass it off as that being your estimate all along. Just yesterday you said $250 mil ww and $100 mil international.

          • popo123

            No I did not. I didn’t edit anything on my predictions. I said it will break $100m overseas not earn exactly $100m overseas. When I FIRST stated my overall prediction of $250m(and my separate numbers for domestic and international)for the movie, I used $120m for it’s international numbers not $100m.

          • Johny Johnson

            It NEVER said $120 million international like it does now. So somebody changed it.

          • popo123

            I’m not really sure which comment of mine you commented on since I never got any specific notification of your (part 1 2 3 4) replies. But in my first statement where I pointed out a lot of things I stated $130m for domestic, that even Sony might fudge it to reach that number and an overall prediction of $250m. In my second reply to you wherein I explained about it’s probability in South Korea, that is where I added in my individual estimates for domestic and international.

          • Johny Johnson

            The statement that I quoted last – at the very end – it has changed. It originally said $250 wide and $100 million international. That’s why I assumed you meant $150 domestic. I was looking at the exact verbiage when I was typing my reply as I had it open in 2 windows. Somebody changed it at some point during the day.

          • popo123

            Maybe you just minterpreted my statement of it breaking $100m overseas as earning exactly $100m overseas. I did not say anything about the film earning exactly $100m internationally and made sure to include the terms “break” to imply making more than $100m. I indeed specified $120m later after my initial statements of it just “breaking $100m”. So I think that is where the misunderstanding started. Also, a tip. You can view original posts from disqus through your email that you used for registering on disqus. Any edits or changes on any posts will not be included on your email notification.

          • Johny Johnson

            It never said $130m dom OR $120m int’l. So either you changed it or someone hacked your account.

          • popo123

            Refer to my reply to your other comment.

          • popo123

            Were you able to get this reply of mine?
            “Maybe you just minterpreted my statement of it breaking $100m overseas as earning exactly $100m overseas. I did not say anything about the film earning exactly $100m internationally and made sure to include the terms “break” to imply making more than $100m. I indeed specified $120m later after my initial statements of it just “breaking $100m”. So I think that is where the misunderstanding started. Also, a tip. You can view original posts from disqus through your email that you used for registering on disqus. Any edits or changes on any posts will not be included on your email notification.”

            Anyway can you quote the exact comment you are referring to? I also suggest that you copy and paste from your email and not in disqus. So you can see the original comment.

          • Johny Johnson

            You still think $120m international – LOL? It is absolutely tanking overseas. I thought Germany would net it about $8m, and it opened to less than $1.4m – probably finishes with $3m there. Denmark I thought $1.2m, and it opened to $200k and will probably end with $500k. Some of the bigger markets like Brazil & Australia are barely pulling in a few hundred thousand at this point. It’s at less than $63 million international right now and only has 6 territories left to open, and it’s almost tapped out in the markets in which it has already released. I’m going to guess $83m final international and stick with $125m domestic – which gives it a final of $208m ww box office – of which it will net $33m international + $73m domestic = $106 ww box office net. Against a roughly $300m budget. Yikes!!!

          • popo123

            Also, you said i changed my figures again when the one and only prediction I made for this film is $250m(or more) worldwide. I also never stated a domestic of more than $130m. It was you who thought I might be referring to a $150m domestic without basis. You are also the one who kept changing numbers – from your original $200m prediction to $215m(“But, if you feel better about it, let’s give it $215 million ww box office.”) and then recently a probability of $220m(“Sure, it could bump to $220 million instead of $215 million.”).

          • Johny Johnson

            yes – I’ve already said I “guessed” $150m domestic because you stated $250m ww and $100m int’l. You changed it at some point.

            And I said it “MAY” top out at $200m. Then I gave a range to $215m. I didn’t know about Korea and Mexico because it wasn’t listed anywhere. So I adjusted $5m out.

          • Robert

            You have no idea what you’re talking about do you?

          • popo123

            Maybe you’ve been replying to every single comment on this article? Although not sure if that’s enough for mods to delete the comments. Try copy and pasting our discussions on a separate document so you can save everything or if they’ve already been deleted before you can copy them I think I still have them on my email(if you do need them).

          • Johny Johnson

            no – they are auto-spam alerts. has nothing to do with anything but structure.

          • chill_mc

            Good Lord, you’re an insufferable little bitch, aren’t you? The movies sucks, the merchandise is being pulled of shelves, the video game was a flop. As of now, the movie has pulled in $180 million, a TOTAL FLOP. Keep doing those mental gymnastics.

          • Not only that, check this out:

            “I will never again direct another remake.” – Paul Feig http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-director-paul-feig-wont-reboot-classic-movies-melissa-mccarthy-1201832804/

          • chill_mc

            I read that too.

          • Then please feel free to use that article on those who still claim that Paul Feig´s “Ghostbusters” movie isn´t a big box office flop.

          • chill_mc

            Facts don’t matter to them, clearly. The movie speaks for itself.

          • Yes, and so does the 70 million USD loss.

          • DM Duty

            its only a flop because of sexism in america. Had the cast been an all male cast, it would have gone above and beyond in the box office. But alas it had women.

          • chill_mc

            Keep telling yourself that.

          • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

            He’s right if it as a male cast and had actor like Johnny Depp it would of been a box office winner. Having a all women cast for people like you is like saying Jesus doesn’t exist. I bet you believe that women should only have small roles and shouldn’t get nominated for an Oscar. Your an idiot.

          • chill_mc

            Wow, I didn’t think I’d ever meet a mind reader on the internet. How do you know this if it never happened? A male or female cast wouldn’t change one very important thing: the script sucked. It wasn’t a good movie, and the reviews and box office numbers speak volumes. If YOU’RE going to call me an idiot, double check your grammar.

          • Beebop

            I just gotta say – you have GOT to feel freaking dumb now kid. I actually read a lot of this, until I got fed up with your ever-circling defense. Take a moment, and Google NOW the “budget new Ghostbusters,” literally, and you get numbers close to what this John Johnson guy said. It’s been well over a year, and close to $230 M, then you read things like THIS in articles, “In an interview with New York Magazine, director Paul Feig estimated the break-even number was even higher—around $500 million,” and you think – wow… holy crap… SOME people like this John Johnson fella actually CAN do pretty decent predictions. Unbelievable, how that works. Habits, trends, people, predictions… so weird, right? Find a hobby popo. Stop bantering people who have real educational insight with walls of thoughtless text. I’m copying and pasting this as a reply on John’s next *old* post, right after yours, so he can see this too. Nice job John. Hopefully, a year later, you can put this one to bed as a solid victory against morons.

          • Beebop

            I just gotta say – you have GOT to feel freaking dumb now kid. I actually read a lot of this, until I got fed up with your ever-circling defense. Take a moment, and Google NOW the “budget new Ghostbusters,” literally, and you get numbers close to what this John Johnson guy said. It’s been well over a year, and close to $230 M, then you read things like THIS in articles, “In an interview with New York Magazine, director Paul Feig estimated the break-even number was even higher—around $500 million,” and you think – wow… holy crap… SOME people like this John Johnson fella actually CAN do pretty decent predictions. Unbelievable, how that works. Habits, trends, people, predictions… so weird, right? Find a hobby popo. Stop bantering people who have real educational insight with walls of thoughtless text. I’m copying and pasting this as a reply on John’s next *old* post, right after yours, so he can see this too. Nice job John.

          • popo123

            That would be so if my predictions weren’t the closest in the end. While the movie did indeed lose money(I concede on that point). My predictions were still closest to its final box office gross and not to mention if you include home video release gross(total of $265m+ overall), is actually on point. Good day to you.

          • Johny Johnson

            Thanks Beebop. It’s amazing to me how many people will reject what is happening right in front of them. Throwing a tantrum about it doesn’t keep it from happening. Some people become so entrenched in their beliefs that no amount of facts or evidence will change that perception. I fully believe that popo is still convinced that Ghostbusters was a success – even with the final numbers saying otherwise. Alas, I gave it my best shot.

      • Wyrdless

        18 days later and it still hasn’t broken $200 million

    • (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

      & despite that huge financial loss, they’re STILL threatening to make a sequel. Well, a fool & his money are soon parted.

    • buelly6

      You diud good with your estimate, im seeing 217 WW

      • Johny Johnson

        thanks – a little later I adjust to $200m-$215m. Waiting for Japan and South Korea to finish. It probably ends at $225m or so when all said and done.

  • popo123

    How did it “flop so hard”? It’s already made more than it’s supposed budget(Sony denied the $144m budget saying it’s over-inflated but failed to state a number) worldwide and still has months in the cinemas. Also “terrible reviews”? It’s gotten and is getting more positive reviews than negative ones. It also barely opened to half of its markets overseas as well. You need some Box office 101 dude.

    • rugolin

      You forgot to add the $150 mil advertising bill for the worldwide hype machine that gets attached to this kind of project. Also all the percentage point cuts of the revenue that the original Ghostbuster cast and the new cast probably got in their deals to make it. That makes the budget nearly $300 million. Even the director blurted out they needed a BO of $500 mil to even START to be profitable. The spin doctoring and damage control by Sony is amusing to read but the numbers are fairly clearly pointing to a John Carter and Lone Ranger kind of loss.

      • popo123

        In the end it’s Sony who’s going to know if the movie gives them a major loss or not but this is definitely NOT as bad as John Carter or The lone ranger. Those movies had extremely high budget and costs while GB is just less than half of that budget. The movie might not make that much profit or nothing at all but I’m sure it will not be a significant loss for Sony. It will get more back after its home release, online streaming, TV showings and merchandise sales. If a sequel gets announced then that would obviously mean the movie actually made some kind of profit.

        • brandnewhistory

          Look up the definition of “saving face.” Sony will never admit this film has completely under performed. They will spin it, into a positive narrative– as they have been doing all along.

          http://variety.com/2016/film/news/sony-lay-offs-marketing-distribution-1201737700/

          http://nypost.com/2016/07/20/sony-zaps-jobs-following-poor-results-in-us/

          Don’t be so thick.

          • popo123

            I tend to wait until the movie is actually done with all it’s showing around the world and has been released in DVD/Bluray and all that before I judge if a movie has utterly flopped “so hard”. Also I don’t think Sony has even announced anything about GB since its first weekend. The budget statement was made during it’s first week.

            Anyway you know what, whether this film will be a great loss to Sony’s film division or not, it won’t really matter for me. I liked the film, as a lot of the people I know and that really won’t change regardless of it’s box office performance.

          • Arturo Rivera

            Nobody really cares if you and your buddies liked it or not, you have to be unbiased to give criticism. It was terrible and poorly written. It was never meant to be a parody in a similar vein to Scary Movie as it was marketed as a legit reboot. You have to compare this to the original which was far smarter in its comedic delivery, but was balanced with its overall paranormal undertones and diversity of characters (Winston Zeddmore wasn’t a walking stereotype). And as established by a previous commenter, the overall gross isn’t enough to actually save it as the studio still needs to cut what they made. Dividends. The sequels, rather than expressing the nonexistent success of the film, will be more about getting back the money they lost and no sooner forget this travesty (just wait for it to become a ‘let us never speak of it again’).

            The movie was childish, petty, spiteful, and ultimately disrespectful. You do know that many of the ‘positive’ reviews around it are biased or paid, right? Many of those critics are feminists, so of course they’d worship it without giving any actual substance to their critique. Not really sure if you’re a shill or an agent, but you really need to watch your own opinion against a majority vote.

          • popo123

            And how exactly can your “criticism” not be considered biased? I could easily say the same thing to you. You’re implying that any positive review or reaction to this film is false. I liked the film because I watched it and liked it. Just because you and your supposed “majority” didn’t like it does not mean my opinion and all those other people who liked the film’s opinion should automatically be discredited.

          • Arturo Rivera

            If the cast were gender reversed and everything proceeded exactly the same. It still would have been panned and seen as a chauvinistic abomination. You can’t tell me that you’d like it that way. It’s okay when a woman does it, but lo and behold, men are horrible by default. Face it, we live in a world of double standards.

          • ElKonsolero

            If this was gender reversed it would have been an Adam Sandler Movie. Only with the differnence that at least Sandler knows his audience and has a budget accordingly.

          • Arturo Rivera

            Haha, angry Adam.

          • Steven Bilodeau

            @ popo123 Are you sure we saw the same movie?!? Where to begin….? First off it isn’t the fact that it was an all female cast that was the problem. Nor was it the calls of misogyny or feminism on both sides of the debate. The REAL problem as many people have already pointed out, is that the movie ITSELF is sexist, racist and completely UNFUNNY.
            There were some good spots in it it. The special effects were fantastic if Scooby Doo’ish. McCarthy was funny occasionally, ie the wonton running gag. And the cameos were AWESOME!!! But that IS the problem in a nut shell. The cameos were the funniest parts of the movie. But when cameos from the original actors are funnier and more entertaining than the movie itself you have a problem. A big one.
            Now for the parts that sunk this movie….
            1. Know your audience and don’t insult them on a personal level.
            2. Don’t hire SNL actors. Only 1 in 10 is funny and marquee level talent.
            3. Don’t make a feminist movie and then deny that you have done so.
            4. Don’t make EVER SINGLE male in the movie ineffective and stupid morons.
            5. Bad casting. The actresses were not funny at all with ZERO chemistry.
            6. Scooby Doo ghosts! The first two ghosts rocked! Everything else….meh.
            7. Stupid ghost busting gear that appears out of thin air in the span of a day.
            8. The lone Black person being uneducated and a walking stereotype.
            9. Making a feminist laden movie whose biggest fans are 30-50 y.o. men.
            10. A director that makes a movie based on what HE wants to see. See #9.

          • Daltos

            To qoute NotSure2006 who put it much more eloquently

            “Take a franchise with an existing rabid
            fanbase then make a movie for an entirely different demographic and run a
            campaign to make sure to alienate the existing fanbase as much
            possible. Women over 25 is who this movie is for? Huh? That’s like
            remaking Amelie or Dirty Dancing for boys under 15. It’s just a baffling
            decision to me.

            As for me. I’m gonna pass even though I
            love Kate McKinnon and Kristen Wiig. The trailer was terrible and the
            endless “you’re a misogynist if you didn’t like the trailer” articles
            and interviews were a real turn-off as well. It’s a bummer because this
            is the kind of movie that normally I would buy advance tickets for and
            invite a ton of friends to now I think it’s one I’m just going to
            Redbox.”

          • Nick G

            Thank you!

          • Arturo Rivera

            Your welcome. We can do this all day and these cucks wouldn’t hold a candle.

            People still seem to think that there’s some idealisation behind Hollywood. There isn’t. Money, money, money, money, money.

            It takes a special kind of idiot to not understand the business that goes behind films.

          • Arturo Rivera

            The film has busted. It’s a failure, a flop. Reality has settled the dust, and the cucks have migrated. Want to know something else? A very interesting experiment I conducted. I googled “Ghostbusters greatest movie”. The top results? The 1987 blockbuster hit. NOT the reboot.
            Watch out, I’m about to give birth to a meme, share it.
            Ghostbusters 2016 the greatest movie of 2016 – said by no one, ever.

        • rugolin

          I can give other examples that are closer to GB with Martin Scorsese’s Hugo,Golden Compass and Jupiter Ascending which had similar budgets and also suffered big losses even with revenue in the 200m to 350m range. Keep in mind Sony have only made $65 million so far which they keep and they have to get up to at least $300 mil minimum to break even(we think). A tough task as a)they are rapidly falling out of the top ten domestically,b)they are banned from China and c)it has not shown any longevity overseas either. I think it is a case where Sony vastly overestimated the appeal of the franchise and just bet waaaaay too much money on it. Though I have to say I am completely mystified why fans of films get so defensive and incensed about profits and losses. I thought John Carter was an amazing film and I could care less about the knock that it lost money though I would have enjoyed seeing another episode. I liked Andrew Stanton’s reply to BBC interviewers ragging on about production budgets and Box office. He shut them down by saying I made a good film that many people enjoyed and will enjoy for decades to come and the money doesn’t play a part into that only to the accountants at Disney.

          • popo123

            I want to think the same of Ghostbusters. I love the film and I will definitely be buying a 3D bluray of it as I absolutely loved the way they did the 3D(I think Sony should have highlighted the 3D and what makes it unique on their promos). But it just saddens me that people are still spreading hate on everything about it. But then again it doesn’t help that Sony is doing a poor job trying to market and promote the film as well, stooping to the same low as the haters even in some cases. Anyway I’m hoping it’ll breakout in one country at least. It’s not doing amazing on the countries it’s been released so far but it looks like it’s going to do just average and will probably earn just average in the box office overall when all is said and done and will, like I said before, will get most of it’s money from merchandise, streaming, TV and home release.

          • helicopter

            Well people hate it because it is laced with politics. Many fans see this as disrespectful, as they hijacked a beloved franchise which was supposed to be for entertainment into a platform for someones personal Political Agenda.

            Not to mention that they pretty much invalidated the original story with the reboot route, Just imagine a story of Harry Potter where Harry Potter dont even exist.

            Also theyve essentially transformed the franchise from a sci-fi action adventure film (complete with hard, believable metascience and comprehensive in-depth paranormal taxonomy) into an over the top slapstick, anything goes, chick flick comedy that looks more like a reverse sexism parody/mockery of the original.

          • rugolin

            With John Carter I have waited 40 years for the Princess of Mars to be made into a film since reading it in high school. It was great to have the film which perfectly captured Edgar Rice Burroughs old school adventure style,had a perfect and captivating Dejah Thoris and reminded me of the thrill of reading it for the first time with an old dogeared paperback. No matter how much red ink was spilled that was priceless as Andrew Stanton predicted.

          • Steve Smith

            John Carter clearled flopped cause it didn’t have naked people or cannibalism

          • rugolin

            You and Burroughs have a very similar idea as the second book of the John Carter series The Gods of Mars has the Therns(White Martians) who kill and eat pilgrims that come into their valley along the River Iss.

          • Steve Smith

            …..I did read the books and am aware of their quite frankly hilarious hierarchy of cannibalism

        • helicopter

          nah… a sequel will not automatically means that the movie profitted

          it just that the $144 mil initial investments already includes buying off the actors, director, writer, any other casts and necessary utilities to commit into a long term contract as they already planned this to become a major franchise.

          not having a sequel will practically means that these actors will bagged in their extra shares for free without doing anymore jobs and Sony will essentially lost their investments on these talents.

          This is the reason why they insist that a sequel is necessary even though it is pretty much risking for another controversial/flop movie (though im pretty sure they will aligned their budgets for the sequel more realistically at that time)

          Sequel or not, Sony will incur a massive lose on this project, So they might as well made a sequel, recover their investments on the talents, and spam Ghostbusters movies that will likely make some profit (which mean having some realistic budget).

          • popo123

            TBH I think they could have made this GB movie with a significantly less budget. I mean Jurassic World was made with $150m(more with promotions) but the base budget for the production of the film itself is just that. Whatever loss or profit they make on this movie, I just wish if they ever do a sequel, it will be a sequel with, like you said a realistic budget and a film that they will, I hope to God, promote properly, and drastically improve upon. I like the film already but I can see some of those criticism made the people who disliked it. Although I must say people who are not aware of the online hate campaign going on around the film will not notice anything or even make a big deal out of it. It’s just too bad that Sony, after the film’s release actually promoted the film with focus on said issues, instead of just telling people that it’s “a nice movie that a lot of people liked, do watch it!”, or even focus on it’s amazing 3D effects. Instead they had to target the haters.

          • helicopter

            i heard that McCarthy received $12-14 mil for this project…i think thats way too much for an actor of her caliber to receive just for doing a single movie.

            it is more likely a price tag for a long term contract, since Sony is planning to relaunched an entire franchise. if thats true for the other actors then i think thats what made the budget way more bloated than necessary.

            The budget for the sequels will probably normalize on a more realistic sense since they dont have to bait the actors into commiting into some long term contract.

          • popo123

            Makes sense. A budget of around $50-60m or maybe $80m for the sequel should be perfect. It should have been the budget for this film, actually.

        • Graham Strouse

          saying you’re not as bad as John Carter or The Lone Range is a little like saying you’re not quite as short as Peter Dinklage…

    • If you saw the movie and read our review youd know exactly why it flopped

  • Lurking_Grue

    We wanted HP Lovecraft with wry humor and tech but got Scooby Doo pushed though Pixels with ham-fisted gender politics.

    This is what you get when you hire a lazy and undisciplined director and your idea of Comedy is Mall Cop and Adam Sandler.

  • Fenrir007

    Absolutely delighted to see this flop.

  • Bear75

    With all the drama that preceded this movie, ultimately the money did the talking. People did not ask for this movie, insulting people for not wanting it didnt help, and politics is a subject that must be breached tentatively in entertainment. Rothman, Pasquale, and Feig have a lot to answer for. I highly dount they will be trusted with hundreds of millions of dollars after this failure.

  • Phillip Lamb

    Sony’s mistake was to join Paul Feig in his attack on the fans of the franchise, by grouping everyone together under the misogyny flag, and that backfired on them.

  • Steve Smith

    I went in with an open mind. I liked Ghostbusers 1 but not to a “i don’t want any changes in the reboot” level. And I ignored claims this movie would be a feminist movie. I figured it would just be 4 women as the leads….but then i started watching and realized that nearly ever male character was an idiot. Hemsworth’s character was as dumb as a bag of rocks and probably illegal for him to live alone without supervision. Gilbert hitting on him and grinding on him was supposed to come off as funny, but ended up being unfunny and kinda creepy. The dean of Yates school was an idiot. The mayor was an idiot. The fbi agents were idiots. The Indian Chinese delivery dude was an idiot (way to go with creating a great Indian role, the dude just plays another version of the Deadpool taxi driver)
    Then we got Leslie Jones…playing a loud black woman without a college eduction and street smarts…ok, whose idea was that. Even Ernie Hudson, whose Willmore character got jipped in the original was a better character (he was originally supposed to be the smartest and most competent member of the team, but they changed him last minute to an average joe so there would be an excuse to dumb down the fake science so the audience could keep up) i’ve heard that this role was originally to be McCarthy’s, but they gave it to Leslie last second. Still not ok.

    • giantslor

      I also went in with an open mind, as a huge fan of the original. The reboot was pretty meh. I don’t agree that every male character was an idiot. Hemsworth sure, but the others? They weren’t brilliant but they weren’t idiots either. Overall a mediocre film with some good moments.

      • Steve Smith

        Spoilers

        the dean starts giving different variations of the middle finger to the woman while kicking them out. He starts blowing his hand up like a balloon. The FBI agents are just incompetent at trying to stop ghosts. They never even mention how they expect to combat ghosts as the only technology that can belongs to the ghostbusters. (also surprised they didn’t die as the building more or less collapses next to them) The Mayor…well he’s not an idiot, just your usual movie mayor who doesn’t like being compared to the mayor of Jaws but make the same decisions. (that actually was one oif the funnier jokes in the movie). The Indian Chinese delivery guy isn’t the brightest tool in the shed. Why he’s Indian to begin with is beyond me. Would it have been racist to have a Chinese Chinese delivery guy? Is that why? So they cast the taxi driver from Deadpool.
        Maybe I should have said they are either idiots or just stupid characters.
        And it’s not just the guys. The 4 main leads are idiots too. All in all most of the characters just did stupid things. Like the whole trying to open a window thinking it’s a door. Or testing out your plasma guns in an alley way behind a Chinese restaurant. The who McCarthy flying around thing was dumb. (and dangerous) Walking into an active subway is dangerous. She tries to hide behind a wooden door cause we all know ghosts can’t penetrate wooden doors (and she’s the ghost expert, she also looks into the sink…why? I guess comedy)

    • Katara c.

      “i’ve heard that this role was originally to be McCarthy’s, but they gave it to Leslie last second”

      Actually, that would’ve fit better, in my opinion. I didn’t think Jones nailed her role, and McCarthy would’ve done well in it.

      I wouldn’t say the man-hating criticisms are valid, though. With the exception of Kevin and Wiig’s boyfriend, I’d expect that the other men in the movie would’ve behaved the same if the leads were all men. The dean *would* fire Wiig to save the reputation of the school… the college dean being an idiot’s been done before (eg. Community), and it was funny that they thought they had the school’s support when he thought their department didn’t exist…. The FBI & mayor being idiots was really just playing on tropes of idiot politicians and overly self-important authorities. Honestly I found the execution of the Kevin jokes made it work, and if it had been a woman, I would’ve found it funny too. I think it only seems sexist in relation to the fact that the leads are all women. It’s not uncommon for the idea to be that the leads are all likeable good guys, and secondary characters are either outright bad guys, not “bad” but antagonistic to the good guys’ goals, or comic relief. The new Ghostbusters stuck to that, but there’s an illusion of sexism when the leads are all women. I do think it’s just an illusion, though.

  • MBFan

    The film has been in release for 2 and a half week. Yet you’re already declaring it a flop! Gravity was in release for 31 weeks. Yes, the film won’t do too well, but it’s past its production budget, and promotion was $100 million according to other sites so it needs $244 million. I’m not expecting it to reach such a number, but it won’t be the massive flop you think it is when it’s made over $100 million in the US, which isn’t to be laughed at.

    • Johny Johnson

      It hasn’t actually passed it’s production budget. You do realize that the company only takes about 1/2 to 2/3 of the box office. And generally less than 1/2 that internationally. So, of the $158 million it has taken in at the box office (and about 1/3 of that is international), Sony has recouped somewhere in the range of $70 million to $90 million. And, it’s slated to make about $20 million more in its domestic run, and probably $30 to $40 million more internationally. So, Sony will be hard pressed to even end up recouping just the $144 million production budget when it leaves the theater. Then, there’s the matter of $150 million they dumped into marketing, advertising, and distribution. That will be pure loss.

    • manuel hernandez

      I was looking at the Box Office Mojo box office chart. Almost 1000 theaters have dropped the movie. It’s revenues dropped 53%. It made $9.8 million, down from $21 million the previous weekend, which in turn down from $46 million it’s opening weekend. That’s only three weeks. Bourne and Star Trek came out and Suicide Squad is waiting in the wings. So yes, it looks like it’s going to flop bad.
      http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

  • unsocial

    It’s a flop folks. It took 3 weeks for it’s global take to cover it’s production costs.

    • helicopter

      I dont think that $158,000,000 (current value in the time of the comment) world wide gross would be enough to cover its production cost.

      Last time i heard theater operators aint doing charity works for Sony.

      • unsocial

        Considering the marketing costs, the theatre chains’ cut, and front end deals on the movie’s gross it’s going to leave theatres with a massive loss.

        • Johny Johnson

          You are both correct. If a film makes $100 box office, the theaters will take somewhere between $33 and $50. International theaters take around 60%. So, of the $106 million box office, Sony on gets between $53 million and $70 million of that. And, of the $52 million international, Sony only gets about $21 million. So, of the $158 million ww box office, Sony has received AT BEST $90 million and as low as $75 million. It’s nowhere near recovering it’s production costs.

          Then there is the small matter of the $150 million for marketing, advertising, and distribution.

  • Johny Johnson

    Wow – the international numbers for this are horrible per the prnewswire site. It tied for being in the MOST number of territories (84 total), but it ranked 11th in international box office revenues behind: Jason Bourne, League of Gods, Secret Life of Pets, Finding Dory, Legend of Tarzan, Skiptrace, Ice Age, Operation Chromite, Star Trek Beyond, and Train to Busan. It only pulled in $10.7 million international this weekend.

  • Rich S

    Why reeboot a classic, why? Why create the whole argument….. Hey Ive an idea…… MAKE AN ORIGINAL MOVIE like they did in 1984, doesnt matter what sex the stars are.
    Fringe was a great series, why? Because it was great…. The acting, the writing, the stories, I dont think ‘its because it has a female lead’
    Theres too much PR emphasis on the sex issue, and simply rebooting in general

  • Lucius

    Thing is… these Hollywood leftists are so isolated from reality and so used to everyone kissing their asses they don’t know when they stepped on a dog turd. Their people keep saying, “No, you smell wonderful!” And they just keep smiling walking along with crap all over their shoes. Then they walk into the real world and they wonder why everyone is making faces at them and holding their noses.

    • Arturo Rivera

      Tell kids to not be dumb enough to fall for their garbage. You’d be doing a great service.

    • Katara c.

      I think it’s cos a lot of the criticism revolved around the female leads. I had heard charges of misogyny in the fanbase, but I thought it was all overblown. I was honestly surprised to find so many people were actually making that big a deal of it – calling the writers & directors SJWs, saying it’s a feminist movie, that it was man-hating, etc. I agree that there’s not some kind of ground-breaking feminism in the movie, but the reaction to it would make you think otherwise, so it’s not really surprising the execs reacted by saying those people were misogynistic (though I would argue it was *unwise* to make those opinions public).

  • chrizmyller

    I’m glad it’s failing. Not because it’s bad or good. I’m not going to find out any time soon because I refuse to support it. Not because of the female cast, gender is irrelevant. But because it’s a reboot that could have… SHOULD have been a continuation. It was an arbitrary, unnecessary reboot.

    And an unnecessary reboot that should have been a continuation doesn’t deserve to be profitable.

  • Uh, What?

    Saw the film. Loved the cast and the characters. Awful, infantile script that seemed to be written for cartoon characters. Hopefully, they’ll keep the cast and dump Feig for any sequels.

    • I don´t think the cast should be blamed for the outcome of the movie (they are alright imo). Nope, instead I think it´s the cringeworthy script and Feig´s bad decisions that should be blamed.

      • Uh, What?

        I totally agree. The cast did a great job with what they had. Unfortunately, they were given a terrible script. What a waste!

      • Graham Strouse

        I don’t dislike the actors–I like a lot of the work they’ve done, although I don’t know Lesline Jones well. The only thing just seemed like one of those exhausted SNL skits after weekend update….

        • Ah, I understand. Well, the movie flopped big time in the end. And Paul won´t do another reboot anytime soon…

          • Graham Strouse

            Feig just lost Sony a metric fuck-ton of money. He may still be able to get work doing subversively humors middle budget films but nobody will hire him for a tentpole film ever again. Sony could lose 150-200 million bucks on this one and they are already seriously in the shitter.

          • Feel free to inform this idiot about that http://thegg.net/articles/paul-feigs-ghostbusters-2016-flops-really-hard-at-the-box-office/#comment-2857674958 Because no matter what facts and numbers I present to him, the dude just keeps in claiming that the movie got “good” reviews and whatnot.

          • Graham Strouse

            Are you familiar with the YouTube channel Midnight’s Edge? They do some great reportage on behind-the-scenes Hollywood pathology. And they’re refreshingly non-ideological. They’ve done a particularly good job at making sense of the madness behind Sony’s Ghostbusters fiasco. MundaneMatt also has a very good channel and has done a good job dissecting the Ghostbusters fiasco. And he used to work on the edges of the movie industry and has a pretty good grasp of how its economics work. I’ve done a little independent analysis partially piggybacking off their work and the potential losses for Sony look to be absolutely staggering. As of this past weekend GB had grossed about 218 million worldwide. When you figure in marketing costs, theater cuts & so forth this movie could lose 150 or 200 million bucks.

            And here’s one thing that gets my goat–I can really enjoy a good rom-com or chick flick. I grew up in the 80s and 90s and there were a lot of good ones. I’m always down for Mean Girls, Pitch Perfect, or a Molly Ringwald marathon (metaphorically or literally–we can all dream, right?) I also loved T2 and Aliens. Sarah Connor and Ripley are my kind of gals. Ripped and sweaty and can be pretty damn sexy. And the Powerpuff Girls were brilliantly subversive. But this Grrrl Power stuff is about as exciting as watching really old people have sex. I don’t have a problem with it happening. I just don’t want to see it. I think this is sort of analogous to GB2016’s problems…

          • Sorry for a late reply. Sadly enough, no, I have never heard of Midnight’s Edge before. So I have to check that person out. I know of MundaneMatt though. Yes, but those movies were really well-made, and there didn´t exist any feminazi/anti-male agenda in those movies either. Well, the movie would have been much better without the “Grrrl Power stuff”. As the movie focused so much on that part, that everything else became pure garbage.

  • NeronWillRise

    All they had to do was follow-up the originals, not say they never happened. People would’ve never reacted the way they did.

    • Thundercleese

      The best outcome of all this, is that everyone will now pretend that this one never happened, and the originals still remain.

  • Wrinkly cankles

    Nobody wants to see racist Leslie Jones. Her 5 minutes are over.

  • skravitzy

    Eh, look, I’m a woman, and I have no interest in Wonder Woman. There’s about a 1% chance that I’ll see it (I put in that slim chance, because I’d go if a friend wanted to, but I seriously doubt any of my friends will want to see Wonder Woman either). I would much rather they bring Kamala Khan of Ms. Marvel fame to the big screen. For me, Ghostbusters 2016 was ABOUT this cast, but not just *because* they’re women. I ADORE Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon on SNL, and they both dominated in this movie. Carried it, even, but I was in it for them, so that wasn’t a problem for me. I loved it, because I love them! I would not have seen this movie if they weren’t in it, and I will not see the sequel without those two if they were to change the cast.

    • Thundercleese

      Wow, you must be easily entertained if you like those two.

  • Kelley

    I didn’t like the trailers but that’s not that unusually and I was still thing of going to go see what the new Ghostbusters was like. That was until I heard that if you didn’t like the trailer you were a misogynist. Having realized that I was a misogynist there was no way in hell I would pay money to see a bunch of women trying to now would I. The point is I didn’t develop a hate for this movie until Paul Feig and Sony first showed a hate for the fans of Ghostbusters, and men in general. At that point the movie could have been a BLOCK BUSTER I would not go and see it because of the unethical approach used in their marketing by Sony and Paul Feig. Their approach backfired and many people like me who may have gone and seen it out of curiosity now wont out of principle.

    • Shaman McLamie

      Normally I would defend and root for a new movie in a longstanding franchise. I’ve come to loathe most fans of any given franchise especially those that will hate anything new just because it’s not the original and enter the conversation with an undeserved sense of entitlement(James Rolfe’s video kind of exemplifies these attitudes) over how a new movie should be made. When the whole thing got quagmired in gender politics and all critics were being called out as misogynists no matter what, I could not back back this reboot and rooted for it’s failure. I guess I dislike Virtue Signalling Progressives and Feminist more than Entitled Over Zealous Fanboys. Ivan Reitman hit the nail on the head all the fan anxiety over the new Ghostbusters wasn’t misogyny, but love and I’ll argue zealous love of the Original.

      • Clark O’Brien

        RedLetterMedias recent video showing that the childish misogynistic comments didn’t even meet 1% of the people who viewed the maligned trailer makes the whole aggressive gender politics, used to basically garner sympathy for the movie, even more absurd.

      • McHunt

        Did you even watch James Rolfe’s video? There was no entitlement to it at all.

  • Nanya

    Aww, was hoping to have my comments put in there. Oh well. XD

    • Oh? Well, I have added you here and there on other posts 😉

  • What MEN face under Hillary’s man-hating feminist regime: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXD_-K-UNMk

  • Francis Dec

    I’ll be buying the DVD soon at my local Dollar Store.

  • Spartas Edge

    I totally agree with the site, the numbers don’t lie, and to argue against the cold hard numbers is arguing against fact, which is outright denial.

    I really don’t get why or how anybody could defend this trash, this travesty to the Ghostbusters franchise.. Its not funny, the Ghostbusters themselves are like living cartoon characters, characatures.. Its an all-female cast for the sake of it it seems, and the casting choice was one of biggest blunders in cinema history, and as a result of the ‘sisterhood solidarity’, it loses all the banter between each other that made the original Ghostbusters chemestry so great, heck, even their outfits look god awful lol. Its like if they thought they threw a ton of cash at it, it would all be good and dandy and people would lap up whatever rubbish they tossed our way, but guess what, its not, its an unmitigated disaster that’s ultimately all as souless as the ghosts they are tryin to catch as both a movie and to Ghostbusters.

    It probably didn’t help that that top Sony exec had a hissy fit at the negative raction to everyones opinion to what they had made, and having a rant at the very people they wanted and needed to go and pay to see their movie, he needs to take a course in public relations. Sony simply should have taken peoples opinion on what a good movie woukd be and who they would want to see play the Titular team, and generally used their noggins when it came to the decisions they ultimately made for this film, because frankly Sony just can’t afford to throw away money on garbage like this.

    Sony have learned the hard way, that its perhaps not be complacent, put a bit more thought into their investmentsand realise that as a company its best to give people what they want, and not have tantrums when there is a negarptive reaction, when they ignored all that and made something thats awful in the first place. When you make manure, don’t be surprised when people say it stinks.

  • Shaman McLamie

    Sony would be ballsey as hell to continue this franchise on it’s current course. The Female Ghostbusters became toxic shortly after that first trailer. The best they can do at this point pull the plug on Ghostbusters for now and hopefully reboot it again in a decade.

    • That´s what I would have done. As the IP has been burned down to the ground thanks to the new movie…

      • Shaman McLamie

        Well as I said it’s not entirely hopeless, but it will require Sony to put faith in different directors with a radically different direction. Such as the proposed Ghostbusters movie proposed by the Russo brothers. Before they didn’t Greenlight it likely do to marketing conflicts with Feig’s Ghostbusters and brand over saturation, but with that being a total bust Sony might be able replace the New Coke that is Feig’s Ghostbusters with a Classic Coke of a Russo(or some other Directors) Ghostbusters.

        • Well, sony lost about 70 million USD on the movie…But I guess that a new producer and some new faces could work?

  • prodeg

    From now on it will be known as the Ghostbusters satire that couldn’t get it up. Feig a simi popular satire director was handed the Ghostbusters franchise to deliberately create a parody of the Ghostbusters films. “What is the problem with that?” you may ask. Well you may have a different memory than I but I don’t think the makers of Johnny English or Austin Powers ever being handed the keys to the James Bond 007 series and making any claim to Johnny English and Austin Powers being any sort of viable replacement for such a beloved series. Yet here we are with a cheap ethical quandary involving a equally beloved franchise that includes over thirty years of video games, cartoon series, toys and more merchandise than wasn’t even licensed yet is heavily collected. When I watched the new ghostbuster movie, every scene was a gender switched parody of a scene that already been brought into existence. “I know this scene but it’s a cartoon of its self” is all I could think. We are working up to Zuul in the next movie….really?…I thought maybe there would be more than a cheap parody created for a new generation but all I see is a husk of a classic horror style comedy adventure, regurgitating hollow scenes already performed by a great and highly talented group just to be re-acted out to get a cheap generic laugh and money from the people willing to pay. (I personally didn’t have to) to end this I have made my point…don’t hand the keys of any beloved franchise over to a parody director and expect a great film…it’s satire at best and should have never received the name Ghostbusters. I still want Ghostbusters 3…I feel it’s owned to me now.

  • peggy

    THIS IS THE WORST HEADLINE AND REVIEW EVER OF A GREAT ORIGINAL MOVIE THAT WAS UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT IN ITS STORYLINE AND CONTENT COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS GHOSTBUSTERS FILMS HISTORICALLY.

    • I honestly don´t know if you´re trolling, being dead serious, or if you´re just being sarcastic.

  • (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

    Is Leslie Jones really a comedienne? A real comic knows how to deal with hecklers. Real comedians can’t be sensitive. Real comedians knows that political correctness kills humor.

    • Well, she´s said to be one at least. You´re 100% right, thus shows like Comedy Central´s Roast TV-series. That is true as well, and in Sweden you can´t be a real comedian because of that fact.

  • gerald springs

    I am one of those who really liked the original, can’ t see how a remake could be much better,no they should have left ghostbusters alone,go do something original for gods sake!

  • Bruce Wayne

    never understood a movie that deliberately slams half of it’s potential audience….I mean come on melissa mccarthy shoots the evil white male in the dick..
    And then the director blames fan boys for the movie flopping…
    Who would want to view 90 minutes of male bashing..hope sony loses 300 mill

  • sigmundfraud

    You know it is a monumental flop, when no one is interested in seeing the pirated version of the film. rofl…

    • Correct, or when you can´t even give away tickets for the movie in question…

  • Will

    >the bad reviews

    The majority of reviews were actually positive.

    • Yes, and the 70 million USD loss were actually not a loss 😉

      • Will

        ….The implication here that both comments are equally accurate isnt true, the majority of reviews for ghostbusters were overall positive.

        • http://www.metacritic.com/movie/ghostbusters-2016 – 2.7/10 – Based on1585 user ratings

          http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1289401/ – 5.5/10 – Based on 74,741 user ratings

          https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghostbusters_2016/ – 57%/100 – Based on 104,073 user ratings

          • Will

            From actual reviewers though it was at 73%. Th ones you posted were user ratings which are known for being unreliable, for example people were voting for films before they have even came out.

          • Rottentomatoes
            Average Rating: 6.4/10
            Reviews Counted: 291

            Metacritic
            60/100
            Mixed or average reviews based on 52 Critics

            So what? It´s already a proven fact that it´s a very mediocre movie which flopped really hard.

          • Will

            >Reviews Counted: 291

            Yes, and out of that larger sample 73% of critics ranked it overall positively.

          • Look dude, no matter what you say. The movie flopped. It’s a known fact worldwide. And Paul Feig himself even crawled to the cross and admitted that he would never EVER again do another reboot.

          • Will

            I wasnt taken issue with how the film did financially, i was just pointing out that the majority of critics who saw it gave it a positive review.

          • “majority of critics” the paid ones or the non paid ones? Come man, even Bill Murray couldn´t hide what he really thought of the movie (his under contract with Sony).

          • Will

            >the paid ones or the non paid ones?

            Any evidence that these critics were paid for?

          • Common sense, logics and stats numbers from the whole world? Furthermore, I highly doubt that they would admit something like that publicly.

          • Will

            What stats, what numbers?

          • Ffs dude, I have already given you enough numbers. And just read through the comments on this post…

          • Will

            You didnt provide any numbers or stats to show that critics were paid off.

          • Will

            >the paid ones or the non paid ones?

            Thats just silly theory people have come up with to rationalise the fact that the majority of people who critique films for a living have a different viewpoint to them.

          • Even if that was the case, the movie still flopped. And the empty theaters all over the world speaks for itself really.

          • Will

            >Even if that was the case

            For now it seems that it is the case.

          • Thundercleese

            And it’s a well known fact that the reviewers that you are talking about are Hollywood ass-kissers and the sjw ilk.
            If you ever base, going to see a movie on what a “movie reviewer” writes,
            then you are missing out on some of the best movies out there, and being suckered into seeing the worst.

          • Will

            >And it’s a well known fact that the reviewers that you are talking about are Hollywood ass-kissers and the sjw ilk.

            Care to present facts for such a view point.

            >If you ever base, going to see a movie on what a “movie reviewer” writes,

            Quotation marks, were getting serious.

            >then you are missing out on some of the best movies out there

            What films which have gotten, lets say, less than 10% on rotten tomatoes are really great pieces of cinema?

          • Will

            >Even if that was the case

            It was the case.

          • No.

          • Will

            Again, it was, over 70% of critics gave it a positive review.

          • Bullshit, it´s below 60% everywhere in the world.

          • Will

            Again, on rt we see it to be above 70%. It would need to be below 50% for my point to be mistaken.

          • https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghostbusters_2016/#contentReviews – Sounds legit mate, the audience score = 55%.

          • Will

            55% is above 50%.

            Also i was clearly referring to the critical reviews, as opposed to a poll in which anyone can cast a vote on, even before the film came out…

            So again you are mistaken about this issue.

          • Are you paid to suck up to the Ghostbusters movie or what? Every single country in the whole world took a huge dump on it son.

          • Will

            >Are you paid to suck up to the Ghostbusters movie or what?

            Why would i have to be paid off, im merely expressing a simple truth that most critics gave the film a positive review.

          • Because you´re full of shit, that´s why.

          • Will

            By pointing out facts?

          • “most critics gave the film a positive review” That´s a fat lie, and you know it.

          • Will

            Are you retarded?

            Ive shown you clearly from rt that most critics gave it a positive review.

            Again, most critics gave it a positive review, but you seem tremendously upset by this simple fact which really shouldnt be a big deal.

          • No, are you retarded? “most critics gave it a positive review” – In your dreams perhaps, but in reality, the majority took a shit on your crap movie.

          • Will

            Cinemascore which rates actual audience viewers found that it got a B +.

          • I could find a good grade for every single crap movie that has been released since the dawn of movies. So what? It flopped at the box office, the user reviews and the Youtube reviews speak for itself. Hell, even the toys had to be removed from the store shelves as no one wanted to buy them.

          • Will

            >Youtube reviews

            Hahaha!

            What high standards you have.

            Look bud, most critics who understand films thought it was a decent enough film, the majority of them.

            I dont know why this upsets you so much, that you are there with your lip trembling at this fact.

            You hold a certain view, the majority of critics hold another, accept it and move on.

          • “What high standards you have”

            – As if “movie critics” would have a “higher” standard. Accept what? That the movie flopped, that it turned out so bad that some countries didn´t even bother to show it at all? But don´t worry “bud”, because part II will fail even harder 😉

          • Will

            >As if “movie critics” would have a “higher” standard.

            Compared to you, yes, they certainly do, you even have difficulty knowing what a majority is.

            >;)

            A smile and a wink, my goodness, how above it and aloof you are, shame that youve shown beforehand that basic math isnt your strong suit.

          • I wasn´t talking about myself; you stupid twat. HAHA! And your math is better? So tell me boyo, how´s the box office numbers and user reviews doing for ya? Bonus, the movie is so shit that retailers have now started to sell the Blue-Ray and DVD editions to giveaway prices.

          • Will

            >I wasn´t talking about myself; you stupid twat.

            You actually were, again, i repeat, most critics know what a majority is, you dont.

            >HAHA!

            My goodness, that isnt forced at all.

            >how´s the box office numbers

            Eh, about okish for a comedy.

            >the movie is so shit

            Majority of critics disagree

            :/

            And thats the thing, i thought the film was just fine, fine, i wouldn’t write home about it.

            But some people like yourself are so upset about they just have to keep ranting about it with their trembling lip. :’ |

          • Flop

            If your using rotten tomatoes as your source you really are delusional. By the way, since you are using rotten tomatoes as your critic source…try clicking on top critics and see how that rating drops…spoiler alert: it’s 59% which more equal to regular user scores and is 1% less than metacritic.

            Most common reviewers(such as New York Times lackluster biased review critic) rated it higher because they want the movie to succeed as a personal agenda rather than what it actually is…a movie.

          • Will

            >If your using rotten tomatoes as your source you really are delusional.

            Hardly. It gives a solid viewpoint of what the majority of critics found, as opposed to presuming what most critics believed off the top of their heads.

            >spoiler alert: it’s 59%

            So the majority then gave it a positive review, regardless it is better to get the view from the overall sample size, then the value goes over 70%.

          • Flop

            Top critics have it 59%…did you you even stop to think why they are considered top critics? It’s because the look at the film as a whole, not because they look past the fact it’s a terrible movie because “girl power.”

            Look at all the actual critics who have given a true review of the movie(low rating scores). How many of them have been accused of being sexist or racist? Ghostbusters didn’t succeed as a movie, it only succeeded in making the ugly side of the insignificant amount of sexist men and equal amount of sexist women.

          • Will

            >Top critics have it 59%…

            So the majority of top critics then gave it a positive review.

            >It’s because the look at the film as a whole, not because they look past the fact it’s a terrible movie because “girl power.”

            Actually it has to do with how long they have been in their position and the exposure of their publication.

            >Look at all the actual critics who have given a true review of the movie(low rating scores).

            They are no more or no less true than the critics who liked it or the critics who thought it was only ok.

            Again the majority of critics and the majority of top critics gave it a positive review.

          • Flop

            You think 59% is positive? If your kid comes home with 59% on their SATs, Exit Exam test scores, college courses, hell even elementary, you would congratulate them for their success? I don’t think anybody has ever been excited to score anything less than at the very least a passing grade of 70%

            So you think the top critics(according to your own words) have all had experience in their field of work since they have been there longer? Why is it they graded it low while others inflated the score? Look at Richard Roeper(if you even know who that is). He rated it the lowest of the low with one star and he was blasted online as being a racist, sexist man-child, even though Richard Roeper has been doing movie reviews for many years and was working under/with who many consider the greatest movie critic of all time.

            So no, top critics have not rated the movie the same. Top critics have rated it with a mediocre to failing grade, while the other lesser biased critics who look towards agenda rather than the film itself, have rated it significantly higher and practically put the film on a pedestal of misogyny.

            So again. Top critics did not give ghostbusters a good review. The movie failed. Stop being delusional and think this movie even somewhat succeeded, because it failed on all fronts.

            P.S. Please don’t even bother responding. It truly is annoying to have to repeat the same thing over and over because you are too stubborn to just admit failure when the numbers and multiple facts prove it

          • Don´t bother with that guy Flop, his been dropping comments like that for days (I think it´s the same person who´s been doing it for weeks, but under different names).

          • Flop

            I thought my fiancé was thick headed and stubborn, but there’s always that one person that has to prove you otherwise haha.

          • HAHA! Yes, there is always someone worse 😉

          • McHunt

            If you have a fiancé, why are you wasting time arguing about a movie with Internet trolls?

          • Will

            >You think 59% is positive?

            I think it is a majority.

            Is it really that complicated?

            > Look at Richard Roeper(if you even know who that is).

            Yes,because the guy who used to sit next to roger ebert is so underground.

            >So again. Top critics did not give ghostbusters a good review.

            Over 50% is a majority, over 50% gave it a positive review.

            >multiple facts prove it

            The facts back me up.

          • Will

            >.spoiler alert: it’s 59%

            Which is over 50% and therefore a majority.

          • Will

            User reviews arent reliable, many of these were negative before the film even came out.

            Id tell you to wise up but you likely knew this already.

            Again, as it stands the majority of reviews from critics who saw the film gave it a positve review.

          • Wise up? Positive review? Look, I´m not going to go through this yet again. So I´m just going to leave you to read through the comments on this post. Furthermore, it´s a fact that the movie flopped, and the box office numbers don’t lie.

          • Will

            >Furthermore, it´s a fact that the movie flopped, and the box office numbers don’t lie.

            Im not taking any issue with its box office performance, im merely pointing out that the majority of critics gave it a positive review.

          • You got all the facts, evidence, links and what not in this very comment section. I´m not paid to spoon fed you with facts that you never wanted to hear in the first place.

          • Will

            >You got all the facts,

            That the majority of critics gave it a positive review. Indeed i did.

          • Are you still going on about this +one month later? Get over it, the movie flopped, and it´s pure rubbish.

          • Will

            >Get over it, the movie flopped,

            It certainly didnt do as well as its makers wanted.

            >and it´s pure rubbish.

            Critically it did well.

          • “It certainly didnt do as well as its makers wanted.” – Get real, even Paul Feig himself said that he will never EVER do another reboot movie.

            “Critically it did well.” – Yes, so much so that no one went to see it.

          • Will

            > Get real,even Paul Feig himself said that he will never EVER do another reboot movie.

            How does my previous comment contradict this.

            >Yes, so much so that no one went to see it.

            Clearly not true, also financial success isnt a great method of determining whether a film is good or not, if it was we would rank transformers 2 over 12 years a slave.

            A valid way is by critical response, and it was found that the majority were positive.

  • Niagara

    Folks it’s clear almost four weeks in this willl be one of the biggest bombs of 2016. End of story.

    • Are you sure Niagara? Are you sure!? xD (IT Crowd ref).

      • Thundercleese

        When all is said and done with this movie, maybe they should try unplugging it and plugging it back in?

        • I would do that with great care, and this time they better find a better producer.

  • sad_boy22

    Today Paul Feig went on record as indirectly acknowledging that Ghostbusters is a flop when he is quoted as saying “I will never again direct another remake.” Just original material for him from this point forward. I’m sure seeing the movie fade from theaters without a hope of making up the huge production+marketing costs has been a rude awakening for him.

    • Try telling that to some of the SJW and feminist folks on this post. As they don´t want to hear anything about it.

  • MegaSolipsist

    Wow.
    It seems that constantly insulting and disparaging potential audiences and systematically alienating anyone who might want to watch your movie isn’t actually a good marketing strategy.
    Who would’ve guessed?

  • kirkpatrick

    Who would have imagined that a movie about four exceptionally unattractive women wouldn’t be a box office smash? This is fat shaming of epic proportions!

  • Frankie Smales

    I wouldn’t put it past Hollywood execs to reboot charmed next except with three
    dudes and didn’t they attempt an reboot of the karate kid in the 90’s with a female
    as the protégé instead of a dude and coming soon THE THREE AMIGETTES
    with three female silent screen stars and also they did a female version of
    the young guns called bad girls and rebooted fright night again in 2013
    having a female playing the titular vampire joe paradox much.
    frankie holtzmann smales.
    alienbugstomperfan

  • DM Duty

    Want to know why this movie flopped? The real unabated reason. Lets get down to the nitty gritty. Sexism. People could not stand to see the movie they grew up with and loved rebooted with an all female cast. Thus people refused to go see it or even give it a chance before it even launched. If they would have. They would have seen this movie was a B rated comedy, much like Ghostbusters before it. It had great special effects and a decent plot that almost made sense, minus a few plot holes. The villain was decent, the jokes were on point. it was not a BAD movie people, but sexism ruined this movie, not the movie itself.

    • helicopter

      If geeky movie goers have gender biased? then how come movies with female leads like Alien, Kill Bill or Hunger Games became such a hit? Why is it that the Star War Force Awaken and Mad Max: Fury Road adid well in the box office?

      Meanwhile Robocop and Total Recall (movies with male characters) were poorly receive.

      Your argument is either born out of personal ignorance or youre just deluded with your self-righteous PC politics that you refuses to acknowldge facts and reality in order to create your perpetual victimhood narrative

    • Are you dead serious? Or are you just trolling? Sexism had ZERO to nothing to do with the fact that Paul Feig´s “Ghostbusters 2016” flopped at the box office. Because the movie failed simply because people didn´t like it all that much.

      • Katara c.

        Nah dude, sexism actually did have something to do with it. Maybe it’s more accurate to say sexism combined with SJW ideology? Just check all the comments on here about how women can’t do combat like men and how they were all jerks, and how it was all man-hating and stuff. There are a lot of them 😛

        And there were comments like that before the movie was even released – an all-female cast just for the heck of it was met with accusations that GB was radical feminist SJW garbage. I think given the current PC climate, people maybe overreacted to it. Then, condescending reactions from Feig and others didn’t help the matter – in the eyes of people claiming it had some crazy feminist agenda, their reactions only cinched their suspicious. That’s why they had petitions and critical reviews before the movie even came out….

    • Thundercleese

      Let’s get down to the nitty gritty shall we. Make sure you finish such a comment with IMHO.
      Because what you stated about this film is rarely stated by anyone but the likes of you.
      The original was far from a B movie when it originally came out by the way.
      But thanks for making a point of claiming that the 2016 was a B movie.
      In your opinion of course.

    • McHunt

      Sexism did ruin this movie. Paul Feig and Amy Pascal’s toxic sexism ruined any chance the movie had at appealing to a mainstream audience. I agree that some of the jokes were mildly amusing, but they don’t compensate for the glaring flaws and overall hostile tone of the movie, IMHO

  • mark

    shows just how terrible and disgusting Hollywood and the current establishment in this country can turn something so classic and beloved into their warped vision of what they want modern society to see. Should have just kept it as close to old school as possible with a few twists but no they would rather destroy the name of the original and make something as ugly as this. By the way, I did not go see it, knew it was a huge flop from the start, after I threw up, from seeing the trailer.

  • The Order of the Banana

    Good! Now throw the remaining copies of this abortion of a movie into a volcano!

    • You mean like Atari´s “E.T”? 😉

    • Thundercleese

      Wouldn’t it be nice if they didn’t distribute it on bluray or dvd, and didn’t sell it to any cable company, and we would never have to hear of this pathetic excuse of a movie ever again.

      • The Order of the Banana

        That would be the definition of Heaven!

  • Teenie She

    I’m a woman and I found this movie to be terrible, offensive and borderline racist at times.
    So am I basing my opinion off sexism? Nope.
    I’m basing it off of this being a terrible movie with flat, tired, comedy (the majority of the jokes were old and tired 10 years ago..), the main black female was a horrendous “mmmmhmmm-oh no he didn’t- giirrrrl-bye Felicia” stereotype that I found to be WAY more offensive than the silly *all female cast* angle everyone is focusing on…
    The CGI was subpar, the story was atrocious, did I mention the comedy was terrible? And finally the cast had absolutely NO working chemistry together!
    They weren’t enjoyable to watch at all! Whereas the original cast just “meshed” together so well.

    So I reiterate – my opinion (and probably the vast majority of the opinions) has nothing to do with male dominating sexism, with this being another example of the MAN keeping womenfolk in their proper place in society (or any of that horse-shite)…its just a bad, bad, bad movie.

    P.s.
    Did I mention the comedy sucks?
    I really wanted this movie to be good too….I love Melissa McCarthy, but I don’t think I will ever be able to look past this skid-mark in her acting underpants. :/

    • I can´t say that I´m surprised to read this. As I know quite a few females that feel the same way that you do.

  • known2pwn318

    This is the type of movie you wait until it’s on Netflix or Cable TV to watch. Even then, you will most likely change the channel at commercial break and forget you were even watching it. This movie is basically a turd in a shoe box. You’re expecting some fresh new Nike AirMax shoes and there is literally a turd in box….a turd.

    • That´s most likely what the movie experience will be like for the most 😛

    • McHunt

      This is the kind of movie you pirate. Or, even better, you just don’t watch at all.

      • known2pwn318

        It’s not even worth the download space.

        • McHunt

          Touché

  • buelly6

    I watched the original again last night after seeing the new reboot when it came out with my daughters.. there really is no way to avoid the fact the new version is exceptionally poor compared to the original. I agree with some posters, if it had taken off where the others left off, kinda like the kids taking over the parents role in the industry or some twist of that, possibly I would give it higher marks.
    the CGI was Average.

    • Well, that´s what the most of us thought when we watched the movie. So no wonder why the old movies have started to sell like crazy again…

  • John Lord

    he said others were delusional about the numbers. His numbers were ridiculous. 500 million to break even? Sony themselves have said that their break even numbers are 300 million. As a side note, the developer of the game did not go bankrupt over the game. You really think they would go bankrupt over a game they released 3 days ago? They had creditor obligations over a previous game that failed.
    another thing: dvd/merchandise sales don’t figure into whether or not a movie is considered a flop, although in my opinion they should be. As of now, with 230m ticket sales, and using your number of 100m merchandising and sony’s break even number, they have already made 55 million dollars (they get ALL of merchandising, not half)

    • How much more horse shit are you going to scope up? Because no matter what you bring to the table the outcome is still the same. As the movie flopped, the game flopped. Hell, Paul Feig himself even admitted that he won´t do another reboot EVER AGAIN. Seriously dude, your like that one guy who can´t accept that your team lost the Super Bowl or something like that. Fair enough. However, the game still caused them a lot of financial problems as it was indeed a multi-format title.

      • John Lord

        i don’t honestly care if the movie flops in the theaters. That’s not really an issue with a franchise film. Pre-orders of the DVD are setting records. The toys are so much in demand stores can’t keep them in stock. It already made the company money by reinvigorating the brand. Were you aware they put the original back in theaters for two weeks before this came out? You can also see a huge boost in sales of the first two movies. This was a bad year in general for films. More than half of the blockbuster budgeted ones took a loss. Independence day, suicide squad. etc. You almost had to be animated to make money. The numbers are wonky all around on this movie though. The budget was 144m but sony only paid for 75% of it and lions gate 25%. They are tight lipped about some details but specifically stated they would break even at 300m which means they were personally in it for maybe 170m.

        Personally i liked it, and if you have seen it and didn’t, i respect it. I don’t respect people who talk mad shit about it but never watched it. Let’s face real facts. If everyone who says the movie is shit had actually seen it, it would have beaten Dory. Every single person i know that has seen it loved it. Not just some of them. All of them. as for the (admittedly sucky) game, it’s being distributed by activision and is still for sale. The creator went bankrupt but that doesn’t really matter.

        • Johny Johnson

          I hadn’t read this before I replied. Ignore my previous reply. You clearly have, and have no interest in ever having, a clue…

          “DVD pre-orders setting records – stores can’t keep toys in stock” LOL – you might be the biggest fool who has responded to this article.

    • Johny Johnson

      First off, the production + marketing/ads/etc was almost $300 million – so the break even number is way higher than that.

      Of that 230m ticket sales, they probably got in the neighborhood of $130m. You do realize theaters don’t show films for free, right? Instead of trying to explain it (yet again), just read this if you don’t understand. In regards to domestic films: http://io9.gizmodo.com/5747305/how-much-money-does-a-movie-need-to-make-to-be-profitable

      Now, internationally, the studio makes much LESS – in the neighborhood of 40%.

      Regarding merchandising, they obviously don’t get ALL of that money – because they had to pay to make, package, distribute, and advertise the merchandise.

      In all, it’s probably around a $100 million to $120 million LOSS for Sony. And that’s why sequels have already been shelved and live action Ghostbusters will once again be in hibernation mode for a long while.

  • mohammad loanservice

    WE OFFER ALL KIND OF LOANS – APPLY FOR AFFORDABLE LOANS.
    DO YOU NEED A LOAN? Do you need a loan for a business start up? Please, contact us for more
    information: [email protected]om

  • jimjimmy123

    This movie was for dumb people

    • Tell that to the people in the comment section who defends the movie…

  • Mick

    It was feminazism gone mad! It failed because it was cast with all women for the sake of it being women, it’s the usual library regressive bull shit we are getting thrown at us on a daily basis. Marvel have started doing it because people are complaining about female role models etc. Well write a movie that includes a female role, don’t over egg it and make her do unbelievable stuff, a woman (unless she has super powers etc) can not put a 6ft 6 marine down etc. It’s just bull, I thought martial arts for years and it’s just not possible! Roles like reply in alien was brilliant, the character was believable, she was strong (bar the fact that she carried the two guns strapped together at the end!) I’m just sick to death of the whole PC bollox not just in films but in every aspect of life. It panders to mediocrity not to equality.

    • Your comment would summarize the whole thing pretty well, yes. Yep, but that was not what Paul Feig aimed for…

    • Katara c.

      “a woman (unless she has super powers etc) can not put a 6ft 6 marine down etc. It’s just bull…”

      Actually, it’s not. I took martial arts too, and depending on your training, it’s totally possible. Sure, some generic woman couldn’t take down a 6’6″ marine, but a woman with a similar level martial training and good technique could do it. A woman with that training could take down most regular guys.

  • 777Houston

    The problem is not that a new ghostbusters movie won’t be successful. The problem was that they implemented their agenda through this movie. Sony and the other investors got what they deserve… for trying to rip their audience off.

    • SJW/Feminazi and anti-male propaganda…

      • Katara c.

        Actually, it wasn’t very feminist at all (the only possible part that could be perceived that way was Kevin’s character, but I’d argue that if you’ve got an issue with it you might be taking it too seriously). Did you actually watch the movie or are you just basing your opinion on the poor press and undiplomatic reactions of Feig and Jones?

        • Are you serious? Or are you just trolling around? Because everything from the PR to the actual production is as feminazi as it could get. I could watch about an hour of it, then I turned it of. However, Ken watched the whole thing and reviewed the movie not so long ago:
          http://thegg.net/reviews/ghostbusters-2016-review-who-you-gonna-call-someone-else-thats-for-sure/

          • Katara c.

            I am serious! I read the review you posted and it didn’t really surprise me. If someone just didn’t like it, fine. I just think it got a lot more criticism than it really deserved, especially when it comes to being feminazi. Even the review you linked didn’t go much into that element in the actual review of the movie… probably cos there wasn’t enough to warrant it. Let me put it this way….

            ” if you’re looking for a summer comedy that will give you a belly full of laughs that are reminiscent of something you saw as a kid, or teen— Then, sure, “Ghostbusters” will do just that and more. However, if you’re looking to disprove feminist critics about women in roles playing male parts equally, and believe that this film is an original comedy. Then look elsewhere, because it’s not.”

            I went into the movie expecting that it would be reasonably good and funny. I wasn’t a giant fan of the original; it was fun but not amazing, and I just expected this to be fun as well. I wasn’t let down – I thought it was good… not great, but good, and that’s all I needed. I didn’t see anything particularly feminist about it, unless, unlike me, you feel simply reinventing it with female leads as being unbearably feminist (in which case, life must be tough for you).

  • Marina Doshkevich

    when will Hollywood learn that the feminist thing doesn’t sell. Feminists are loud, but they are not many in number. Yes they can overwhelm Twitter, but in the broader audience there isn’t enough of them to make anything work. Only 12 percent of Americans identify with Feminists, as opposed to many( like myself) who believe in gender equality. But gender equality means that both genders should have equal opportunity. Not that if men have something, women need to have it too. Women and men may be equal, but they are not the same. We can say that it is the media that keeps women out of scientific fields, but the truth is, that in tests, women have a stronger language and communication score, and a lower spacial relations and mathematics score. Als, let us not be absurd; Women can not do combat like men. This doesn’t mean they are less. Why not show women doing something, that many women are good at, and show men doing something many men are good at? Also, the characters in the movie were unpleasant, really condescending, and they didn’t have that jerk with a heart of gold like the original Ghost Busters, they were just jerks.

  • A1rh3ad

    You mean people don’t like being called sexist pigs? Who would have thought?

    • Yes, who could have guessed that? 😉

  • Katara c.

    Straight up, I think when people say casting women as leads was a mistake, it really is sexism. Those ladies were funny, especially the one playing Holtzmann. It’s true that the movie flopped, but I think that’s unfortunate and undeserved; I honestly think it’s more owing to the fact that rabid fanboys were tearing it apart before the movie even hit theatres (granted, the trailer wasn’t great – especially in the music department – but it didn’t deserve the ire it got).

    And comparing it to the original… honestly, I first saw the original as an adult, and didn’t think it was *that* funny, plus the sexual overtones weirded me out. It had better effects (for the day), better music, and maybe a bit more charm, but I think some people are seeing it through nostalgia glasses… or sexism glasses (which is funny, cos I’m not one to be very PC, but I found it fine. I saw these articles saying the criticism was all just sexism, and expected it to be untrue, but reading the comments on those articles only supported the idea in a really ironic way).

    Legit criticisms of the new one are that the effects should’ve been more realistic, and sometimes it felt like it was trying too hard – but again, it wasn’t enough to warrant the criticism or make it a bad movie. The marketing could’ve been better. But taken as it is, it was pretty enjoyable and funny, and had some good action scenes in it. It’s worth a watch, in my opinion.

  • Sam American

    Stand up and skit comics are not necessarily good actors/actresses. The team from GB I and II were proved good actors with a great first script – these ladies are not the same caliber. If you had Aisha Tyler, Emma Stone, etc the franchise may have a chance to break even. To make money you would have needed a new director and script as well.

    • That´s 100% true. Well, at least, in my opinion. I mean, a painted pig is still a pig underneath the paint…

  • MajorStyles

    The movie can tongue punch my fart box!!! Feminazi garbage!!

    Over the boat with the Cultural Marxist Hebrews!

    • The movie is so bad that retailers have to sell it to giveaway prices in Sweden…

  • Paul Chach Mcarthy

    “4 Ugly Broads That Can’t Act Put This Ghost Of A Franchise To Rest”

    • Funny enough, we had feminazis whining about this post for months, and no matter how much info and facts we presented to them. They still stated that the Ghostbusters was a huge success story.

      • Paul Chach Mcarthy

        The fems live in a fantasy land, dude. There were dozens of reasons this film was the monumental failure it was. TBH, if I didn’t now any better I would say Sony deliberately sabotaged it on purpose so they could kill the franchise outright as they had no interest at all in rebuilding it. It’s not like GB is a huge fanbase anymore. The last film was over 30 years ago, before GB 2016. Aside from a few cartoons, that was it. All the kids from back then have grown up by now, me for eg, and most of us have no interest in that particular franchise any more as it’s been three decades since the last film. Hell, I’m a huge Alien fnaboy and even I have now lost interest in that franchise and that one is still going strong (despite my hate for Prometheus lol)Sometimes reboots work, like Star wars because the franchise is kept fresh in new audiences minds, but GB was an all but a forgotten relic of the 80s. There was no fanbase for it but Sony had already committed to the expenditure of making a new film so I’d guess they just destroyed it outright and accepted that one loss as opposed to trying to keep a dinosaur of a movie franchise going and taking multiple losses when they have to commit to the inevitable sequels to appease a handful of us GB fans trying to relive our childhoods lol. I could be wrong but the way they took an axe to their own movie smacks of them wanting to sabotage it from the off. When they let PF demonise it’s dwindling fanbase, you could tell they had zero faith in it at all. I mean even Ridley Scott had the good sense to keep his mouth shut and not belittle the Alien fanbase until Prometheus had launched and then when a lot of Alien fans were upset with that move, Ridley backtracked and decided to give us 3 new direct alien prequels lol featuring actual xenos. He knew he had made a mistake and at least is attempting to rectify it to bring the fans back on side. But Sony letting PF do that was commercial suicide, either they are very inept, which I doubt, or it was a tactical decision to be rid of a franchise nobody cares about now which will save them a lot more in the long run.

  • snowdog

    Sounds like they tried the 90’s way of making a movie. All hype, toys, ads on internet, tv, radio, product placement, interviews, talk show rounds…etc. Ended up a bunch of “really smart” mba’s and investor types circle jerking themselves into an orgyistic zen capitalist pig moment, patting themselves on the back, using words like syergistastic and fantabulous to describe their vacuous ideas. Hope this is also a statement on board room liberalism being shoved down every hole in the human body by ivory tower elites talking about how ignorant us masses is over their organic tempeh and fair trade wine parties.

  • Deckard Cain

    The story was bad because the writing was bad.

    The writing was bad because they weren’t trying to tell a story. They used this movie as a vehicle.

    They took sacred F***ING source material and didn’t do the acceptable method of, “Hey, look, it’s the daughter’s of the guys who originally started the business!”

    No-no, they said to themselves, “Those guys didn’t get it right the first time. We know how to do this movie better than the geniuses that conceived and birthed the original.”

    So they did a contrived remake. Take every gender from the original and invert it. Make the bad guy the big evil corporations – never mind in the original it was academia that shunned them and the GOVERNMENT that screwed everything up by breaking the containment.

    Oh, and make the goal of the women to be put on the government dole and given grants, not to be successful in their own enterprise.

    All of that added up to this piece of crap. The performers should feel okay about how they did. It wasn’t really their fault. And they got paid. Their egos thought they’d do this movie and be placed on the same pedestal as Murray, Akroyd, et al. That’s why they’re upset.

    Piece. Of. Crap. Movie.

    • Yep, and keep in mind that Sony will try to push yet another new Ghostbusters movie…

      • Deckard Cain

        You think so? I hadn’t heard that. Did this one not lose enough money? Are there contractual obligations I’m not aware of? lol.

        • Well, at least if they want to lose even more money 😉
          http://www.thewrap.com/ghostbusters-sequel-will-happen-sony/
          http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Sony-Announces-All-Male-Ghostbusters-Works-Get-Details-70214.html

          However, matters “might” change over time.

          • Johny Johnson

            yeah those links are old – they have since cancelled any sequels to this disaster based on the millions they lost. They are talking about doing an animated series or something instead.

          • Really? Well, that sounds like the best move that they could do imo (why burn even more money on crap when you can create something good and earn money from it?).

          • Johny Johnson

            Well, the dumbarses at Sony were more interested in trying to prove a point and make a political statement than making a good movie. So burning money on crap wasn’t a concern of theirs at the time apparently. Of course, I’m sure the Board at Sony threw a fit once they realized they were losing around $100 million on the project, so they cut bait.

            I know they are going to do something animated – whether it’s TV or web series or what have you. Just not sure at this point what their ultimate plan is. My advice would be to bury it for a while then maybe try to do prequels or one-off stories of the real characters if they want to kick start it again down the road.

          • I think anyone would change their mind if they lost 100 million USD on one single movie…Sounds like a good move to me (I did enjoy the cartoon show quite a bit as a kid). Well, that’s what I would have done.

          • Johny Johnson

            Yeah it’s pretty amazing how stupid these studios are at this point – these remakes are tanking over and over. I actually can’t think of the last remake/reboot of a classic non-comic book movie that has been successful (not including animated to live action). The main 3 from last year (Ghostbusters, Ben Hur, and The Magnificent Seven) all tanked massively. The main 2 from 2015 (Poltergeist and Point Break) also were big disappointments. Then there were the disasters of 2014 (Annie, Robocop, Endless Love, and About Last Night).

            I just really can’t think of the last remake/reboot that was really successful. Yet they are planning to remake The Matrix, Suspiria, Time Bandits, and others. It makes no sense whatsoever – but I will keep railing against these pointless, needless remakes whenever they do pop up in the hope that, some day, the studios won’t do them anymore and will instead funnel their money to new fresh ideas that currently aren’t getting the opportunities because of these big budget remakes.

          • They’ve lost a ton of money, and I bet that a lot of people have lost their jobs as well. Nevertheless, most people saw the iceberg at a distance, and they warned Sony about it as well…But they didn’t listen. Oh yes, the remake madness is beyond messed up.

            Hollywood is killing of one classic movie (or series) after another at the moment. It’s all about the money, Hollywood doesn’t give a damn if they burn the whole IP to hell in the process…

          • Johny Johnson

            No they don’t give a single rat’s behind. But they should care that ALL of these recent remakes are losing gobs of money. And these upcoming ones are gonna be massive failures as well. Moviegoers have really caught on to these lazy cash grabs – and they simply aren’t going anymore. I look forward to The Matrix reboot being an utter disaster at the box office.

          • True, just look at the recent reboots, remakes and whatnot. Most of them suck…Yep, as they use famous name to cash in on nostalgia and hardcore fandom. Oh dear…That one is going to be a real disaster with no doubt.

  • Shanna Kimball Gosselin

    I can’t believe all the women haters. You men sound like women actors should have small parts in movies. I think it was great to have a all femal cast and I’m glad it wasn’t like the original one which I did like but the new generation has to see something different. You all are acting like they thought this movie was going to be nominated for an Oscar all it was was a movie to have a good time few laughs and enjoyment which it was. I think all the women cast with great together and they were all very funny. I like all kinds of movies horror is the best but when I do watch a comedy and has to get my attention and knowing that this was all female cast well they did get my intention I enjoyed watching the movie I’m not saying that it was the best movie ever but it was entertaining and funny. Are you sexist man out there need to realize that there are female actors that are better than them so grow up and get over it

    • Ehrm…No? There are plenty of female actors whom I like:
      Jamie Lee Curtis
      Sigourney Weaver
      Ingrid Bergman
      Greta Garbo
      Judi Dench
      Charlize Theron
      Marilyn Monroe
      Elizabeth Taylor
      Audrey Hepburn

      With many more:
      http://www.imdb.com/list/ls057168130/

      Furthermore, I would love to see a full-length “Metroid” movie.

Advertising spot

Help us stay alive

Paypal Patreon logo

Google ads (please turn off your adblock)

Advertisement

 

Play-Asia.com - Buy Games & Codes for PS4, PS3, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Wii U and PC / Mac.

 

 

Recent posts

Ancient Cities interview with Uncasual Games - Game development, crowdfunding success and plans for the future

Ancient Cities interview with Uncasual Games - Game development, crowdfunding success and plans for the future

As I just happen to be a huge fan of games like “Civilization”, “Caesar” and “Age of empires”. I sim[...]
Darkestville Castle PC giveaway - Five steam keys for five adventure hungry gamers

Darkestville Castle PC giveaway - Five steam keys for five adventure hungry gamers

I am very happy to inform you all that we have been given five Steam keys for Epic LLama's point-and[...]
The Journey Down: Chapter three is out now on Steam and the App Store

The Journey Down: Chapter three is out now on Steam and the App Store

SkyGoblin Releases the Final Chapter of their Award-Winning, African Art-Inspired Point and Click Ga[...]
Metroid: Samus Returns 3DS review - Samus and the Metroid series is back in business again

Metroid: Samus Returns 3DS review - Samus and the Metroid series is back in business again

“Metroid II: Return of Samus” was released for Game Boy as the sequel to “Metroid”, and eventually t[...]
Crossout's 0.8.0 Update unleashes the power of advanced science

Crossout's 0.8.0 Update unleashes the power of advanced science

New Faction Opens Hover Tech, Laser Weapons & More Sci-Fi Parts To All Players As Well As Two Ne[...]
Grindstone has announced their roguelike dungeon crawler "Hellmut: The Badass from Hell"

Grindstone has announced their roguelike dungeon crawler "Hellmut: The Badass from Hell"

Press release: Košice, Slovakia -- September 21, 2017 -- Industry veteran Peter Nagy has announced [...]

Google ads

Our sponsors

Kinguin
EwinRacing Calling Series Gaming Chairs
TGG v2.4 © 2014 - 2017 *The Gaming Ground* all rights reserved
twitch icon youtube icon google plus icon twitter icon facebook icon rss icon
alexa
Privacy policy
TGG ethics policies