Ghostbusters Remake Now Officially Not a Flop

>The point is that Sony had a lot more riding on Ghostbusters than just a big box office, or they never would have approved that ridiculous budget. When all is said and done at the box office Ghostbusters will maybe not have gotten back every single buck spent making it or selling it in ticket sales, but it will have successfully breathed life into an old property that is making money on everything from fruit juice to children’s books to Halloween cost-OMG THAT IS ADORABLE! It re-affirmed Melissa McCarthy and Paul Fieg as major box office draws, launched Kate McKinnon as everyone’s new favorite comedic actress, and even taking into the mantrum that happens in online movie user ratings, most people enjoyed the film. In short, by every reasonable definition of success, Ghostbusters is one. Period. The end.

houstonpress.com/arts/ghostbusters-remake-now-officially-not-a-flop-8622080

Other urls found in this thread:

techspot.com/news/65790-developer-ghostbusters-game-filed-bankruptcy-three-days-after.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

But ghostbuster is a huge success, user. What are you implying?

It's amazing how people who don't know what the're talking about can become journalists. This movie is the definition of a flop. For frame of reference, Amazing Spiderman 2 (another sony picture) made over 700 million dollars at the box office, with production costs of only 250 million dollars. After accounting for all the other costs, sony only walked away with a little over 70 million dollars. This movie was supposed to be sony's big summer blockbuster, and as such they spared little expense advertising it. They developed a game (that's selling and reviewed poorly), made toys's (which besides the ones for the old ghostbusters, are selling poorly), bought up a lot of TV time, and even put adverts on food items (typically reserved for big movies like Marvel and Star Wars movies). Even the director said this movie had to make 500 million dollars, else he risk being put into "movie jail".

movies apparently now don't have to bring money, they have to prop up 'the brand'. It seems that you don't need real products selling now, everything can be an advert of something else.

Also - manbabies can't never ever win. So move the goalposts.

Why the fuck would I care about the money the movie makes? I am neither CEO at Sony nor at Marvel, I literally give 0 fucks about how much it makes. The movie is bad (went to a press screening) and this is all I care about.

I'm pretty sure in times with less of a surfeit of tolerance, people this divorced from objective reality would be institutionalised.

Because I was really counting on seeing the Ghost Corps Movie Universe: Slimer Origins

cry more man baby

It'll just be a John Belushi biopic that continues for a bit after the speedball

>It's amazing how people who don't know what the're talking about can become journalists.
This baffels me so much. Did the internet kill journalism or is the reason that people just so much dumber now than 30 years ago?

I'd love for Sony to get hacked again so we can see their emails about Ghostbusters.

Look at the the movies people here enjoy and what/how they are reading. It's no surprise that journalism isn't wanted anymore.
>he doesn't know about the alien ghosts

>Did the internet kill journalism

Yep, and it made it so that every opinion, no matter how worthless, can find an audience.

Weak. Do better next time you attempt to pretend to be a faggot

>Hey guize we finally broke even. See, this is not a flop. Now who wants to invest another $200 million and possibly break even on a sequel?

>watch new alice in wonderland movie
>kind of okay
except for depp, for some reason was shit in this or I think it was just the script

>Amy Pascal

Sony is fucked they should just go out of business already.

YAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSS

they havent even broken even, box office != revenue

Sometimes it can really feel like this board is full of Sony, WB and Disney shareholders

Isn't that a good thing?

Ghostbusters is unique universe with scientist haunting ghosts. I can't think about any other franchise like this.

So, as long it brings money, they will make movies, cartoons, games about it.

When are they going to make an all female pixels?
Girls can be nerds too you know

it doesn't bring in money is the point

Yeah, because if there's one thing that helps something unique, it's cranking out endless repetitive bullshit about it. That's why Ghostbusters 2 was such a great film, because there was so much depth left to explore.

The only good thing that has been made with the Ghostbusters name on it is the original Ghostbusters. One of the cartoons was passable. Everything else is trash. I hope it continues to make no money, because that way we can actually get something new and not cinematic universe baby ideas of 'it's the exact same story, but with different actors, it's totally unique!'

Girls can make flops too you know?

>they will make games about it
uh, about that
techspot.com/news/65790-developer-ghostbusters-game-filed-bankruptcy-three-days-after.html

Because quantity is quality.

> it will have successfully breathed life into an old property that is making money on everything from fruit juice to children’s books to Halloween cost

And NONE OF THAT is owned by Sony, so they aren't getting shit, that's why ASM was considered a flop too despite Spider-man outselling every other toy.

Ghostbusters probably needs to make 350-400 to be considered a success(and only a MODEST one) and it looks like it'll make like 220, which is TERRIBLE. China banning it was a huge hit, movie seems like exactly the wacky colorful shit they love there, could've been another 100-150 million easily and saved face.

The whole "it's the first movie in franchise, so they don't even need it to make money" narrative is fucking retarded and doesn't make any sense. Don't even care about the movie or controversy, just interested in BO stuff.

>And NONE OF THAT is owned by Sony, so they aren't getting shit, that's why ASM was considered a flop too despite Spider-man outselling every other toy.

But Sony created Ghostbusters. Who owns it, if not for them?

Can anyone mention a single other film where critic's opinions are so different to the masses and where, despite bombing, everyone tries to pretend it's a success?
Surely there must be at least one other?

No this retardation is unique to the 10s.

>Can anyone mention a single other film where critic's opinions are so different to the masses and where, despite bombing, everyone tries to pretend it's a success?
Th critics are treating GB2016 as a political statement and not a film. This means they can't call it a bad film because that could be interpreted as hating women. It is silly but that's the way it works.

But this only improves the review scores of the film, it couldn't actually generate real profits. The cultural war created a better film score but suffers a worse box office as a result. So they won the argument but lost the money. And you can't live off winning arguments.

Internet means any retard with internet excess can claim to be a journalist. The retards have always been there, they just never had the real opportunity to shout out their stupidity on a global scale till now.

>One of the cartoons was passable
Both cartoons were good, though.

I just can't believe so many have an audience.

That's sexist

Well, there are plenty of other retards around to take in the words of their own brethren.

>It re-affirmed Melissa McCarthy and Paul Fieg as major box office draws, launched Kate McKinnon as everyone’s new favorite comedic actress
'no'

I'll take "Statements That Are Incorrect" for 200, Alex.

What's so bad them, then? Go on, tell me.

>In short, by every reasonable definition of success, Ghostbusters is one. Period. The end.

this closing statement reeks of desperation and 'don't question my logic'

Can't you see Paul fag went to movie jail for women's rights! Surely he'll be busted out by a bunch of strong independent women.

How in the fuck is this person a journalist? They write like a 17 year old tumblrina.

Also, can we stop with the
>Period. The end.
shit. That racist asian woman who blasted Matt Damon on twitter did the same thing. Chicks are so obsessed with their safe spaces they don't even want to imagine a single rebuttal.

Not to mention how wrong she is about it being a success. It will probably end up with 120 million domestic. Studios get 55% of the domestic gross - so that's slightly more than 60 million, against a 144 million production budget. Studios get approximately 40% of revenue generated in overseas theaters. The movie hasn't even made 100 million worldwide. The studio won't even get 100 million in revenue during its theatrical run.
>Less than 100m in revenue
>144m production budget, 100m+ marketing budget
>Say 250m budget all things considered
>150m loss
Not a flop how?

The Filmation cartoon was an average 70's piece. Animated at a breakneck pace and written even more sloppily.

The Real Ghostbusters was the passable one. Decent writing, occasionally actually frightening ghosts, turned to mush after 3-4 seasons.

The Extreme Ghostbusters was always a hot mess of 90's edge and tonal dissonance.

The weird thing is that she admits earlier in that paragraph that the movie is failing to make back money as a movie. That's a reasonable definition of success - if a product can't sell on it's own, and has to trust in secondary fluff to cover tens of millions in shortfall, that's not a success.

>occasionally actually frightening ghosts
Opinion discarded. None of the ghosts on either cartoon were ever frightening.

>tonal dissonance
Extreme Ghostbusters managed the whole comedy/horror mix much better than actual horror-comedies and had great chemistry between characters, even if not as good as the original movie.
>90s edge
Opinion discarded.

Do SJWs think that if they bend facts hard enough reality itself will be altered into one where Ghostbuster 2016 wasn't a massive failure?

>Extreme Ghostbusters managed the whole comedy/horror mix much better than actual horror-comedies and had great chemistry between characters, even if not as good as the original movie.
Nice b8

>I don't have an argument, so I'm going to just ignore yours

Most people are idiots. That probably includes myself. The internet allows idiots to communicate on a massive scale, something that wasn't possible before. There's also the fact that reputation is less an issue on the internet. Other than a few journalists, most are completely unknown, so you don't know if they're idiots or not. Most people won't put the energy into reading their entire history to figure out if they're legitimate. And most people can't glean from a single post if it comes from someone retarded.

Yes. And that will kill SJ once and for all.

>any opinion I disagree with is bait
Fuck off.
>ignoring idiotic meaningless memes = HURR U DUN HAVE AN ARGUMENT
Whatever you say, faggot.

That's pretty much all you have to do these days. In two years, nobody will really remember the movie, but if they google it they'll see a bunch of rave reviews, which will positively retrofit their memories. Combined with the fact that nobody can tell how much any movie really makes, and it's easy enough to say, "Yeah, this made money probably."

20 years from now, the dominant narrative will be that 2016 Ghostbusters was the best thing to ever happen to the franchise. Repeat something long enough, especially on the internet (where dates don't matter, only the volume of a given opinion) and it becomes fact. As a society, we're not ready to have this sort of collective consciousness, which can be filled up by enough voices, no matter who those voices are or what anyone else is saying.

>>any opinion I disagree with is bait
>Fuck off.
>writes Opinion discarded. 2x

Nice b8

No it will not. They will see IMDB and rotten tomatos and say oh yeah that was a piece of shit.
Nobody cares about this clickbait not and nobody will care about it in 20 years.

>telling a retarded shitposter to fuck off is the same as calling someone's opinion a bait
I know you're a retarded fuck who can only shitpost, but kill yourself.

>implying IMDB and RT will still be around in 20 years

And even if they are, I would be very much surprised if media companies aren't already paying some Indonesian schoolkids 20 cents an hour to sockpuppet and increase the ratings of their back catalogue, and to 'optimize' search results so that favourable reviews are the most likely to be seen. If 20,000 people give this movie 5 stars tomorrow, it will draw attention. If, over the next year, 40,000 people do so, nobody will notice or care, because the zeitgeist has passed.

>20 years from now, the dominant narrative will be that 2016 Ghostbusters was the best thing to ever happen to the franchise

Then they'll wonder why no new ghostbusters movie was made in 20 years

>Implying we're not going to get a new addition to the Ghostbusters Cinematic Universe every two to four years for eternity

What are you, a sexist?

You seem upset about your b8 not working

>the point of the investment is to not make money, box office isn't important
>the movie didn't make money, which proves we can sell fruit juice
>by failing at the box office we have proved Frig and McCarthy are major box office draws
>that chick no one can name is actually everyone's favorite too
>despite very few people seeing the movie and ita low ratings, most enjoyed it
>reasonable success

Let's have a quiet, slow and shirt clap for a reasonable success. Let's hear it for keeping expectations low. But not too loud.

>he things IMDB wil be come in 20 years while these clickbait blogs will still be up

Something is wrong with your brain m8

>b-b8
>if I repeat that too many times I will be funny.
Get cancer.

In the end, feelings don't matter when it comes to industries. They can use them to sell stuff, but if it's not profitable it just won't get made.

Ghostbusters failed. They'll just find another 80s series to scrape off bottom of the barrel.

And when I say failed. I mean, "wasn't a gigantic success". Sony isn't looking for movies that are barely profitable. They're looking for their own big hit.

>It re-affirmed Melissa McCarthy and Paul Fieg as major box office draws
How?

Damn, you're upset son.

Literally started by saying that IMBD probably wouldn't be around, but I understand reading is hard.

But more importantly, it's not all clickbait blogs. Some actual respectable news sources sold out to Sony, or (more likely) some unofficial blogger posted a review on their site as part of their "lower quality to get quantity" initiative.

I agree with the article.
The important thing is the moral profit for the studio and society in general.
Money considerations are irrelevant.

To be fair, McCarthy does tend to make money. I don't understand why (only saw her in Spy, she was not good), but she does.

Is that an actual article? That's probably one of the worst i've ever seen

Doesn't everyone say how the new Ice Age is such a huge flop? Ghostbusters always seems to be behind it on 7th or 8th place.

So you MRA GamerGators won.

Can you stop harassing women now?

>he wasn't here for the Cinemassacre disaster

Why did Paul Feig say it would not be a success if it made less than $500m at box office?

Could it be because the marketing budget bumped the movies budget to $300m?

Could it be that Cinemas don't give 100% of the box office revenue to the studios and take a decent cut to pay the costs of running the cinema and keeping a reasonable profit?

I saw the video, but i never saw everything else

>Did the internet kill journalism
Journos are without exception the laziest people when it comes to research and were before search engines enabled their laziness even further. If they can avoid confirming the first thing they hear, they will.

>> launched Kate McKinnon as everyone’s new favorite comedic actress
>mfw McKinnon is forced into every new comedy ala Kevin Hart

wait the last time i checked they were at 80 mil how did they make the rest up?
also
>implying the marketing expenses still won't fucking drag this shit down

You missed out, senpai. Got to see actual reporters (or at least people affiliated with actual respected news outlets) lose their shit because some guy on the internet didn't want to watch a movie. Literal weeks of screeching back and forth at each other about how Rolfe was literally Hitler, and making up shit about how he abused his girlfriends and whatnot.

That's EXACTLY what's going to happen
I can put $100 on it

>Period. The end.

Woah...so this is the power of a heavily inflated advertising budget...

You want to know the difference between Ice Age and Ghostbusters ?

Both are shitty movies made to pander to an audience of idiots. They're both bottom of the barrel garbage.

But here's the difference : One panders to its already established audience, retains the same level of overall quality, while churning out the exact same stuff it always did, it's formulaic, it's for kids, it's inoffensive, it makes for great babby games. It's also an established franchise that remains in recent memory.

Ghostbusters shits on its original audience and changed the formula to pander to an audience that's been proven time and time again to not actually buy the stuff you're trying to peddle. The only thing it has going for it is nostalgia, and they squandered the only positive attribute their movie has by insulting those who would have the nostalgia in the first place.

1/10

>movie needs to make $500mil to be a success
>insult everyone under the sun over valid criticism
>WHERE'S MY 500MIL?

...

>writer of IT Crowd
I thought he was cool.

Don't know how many of them were paid or really think that way but either way, this whole bullshit ruined a lot of perceptions in many ways.

Why was it banned in china?

>You want to know the difference between Ice Age and Ghostbusters ?

the latest Ice Age didn't replace all the main characters and the actors playing them

> You want to know the difference between Paul Feig and Chris Wedge?
Chris has an Academy Award for directing.

1. China doesn't import movies with supernatural elements due to cultural taboos. They didn't import a theatrical release of the 1984 movie either.
2. Very little domestic interest in the franchise in part due to no real familiarity with it.
3. If you saw the Chinese movie posters for The Force Awakens, they tend to hide any actor who's black; this isn't really possible with GB.

B-b-but muh rotten tomatoes ;_;

There is an audience for flat earthers. There is an audience for diaperfetishes. There is an audience for foreverial delizied ham and cheese tongue. There's an audience for people dedicated to the hammed up opening scene of the dark knight rises.

The internet was a mistake.

>China's official censorship guidelines technically prohibit movies that "promote cults or superstition" — a holdover from the Communist Party's secular ideology — and the country's regulators occasionally have been known to use this obscure provision as rationale for banning films that feature ghosts or supernatural beings in a semi-realistic way (Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest suffered such a fate in 2006, thanks to its depictions of ghouls and cannibalism).

Though to be fair, I don't know if it was actually banned. There's a lot of articles saying it WILL be banned, according to unnamed sources 'in Bejing', all written in the same week (Jul13-18ish) but no news article that I can see from after that which definitively states, "Yes, Ghostbusters is officially denied release in China."

>There is an audience for foreverial delizied ham and cheese tongue

Don't remind me of this

>this isn't really possible with GB.
Why not? Patty isn't nearly as much of a main character than Finn in TFA.

You do know that in order to make back the money the movie had to make roughly 33 % more in box office than the budget?

>i....it won't make any money..b.....but it was a success because people now remember Ghostbusters
Fuck outta here with that shit. This isn't how Hollywood fucking works. The movie was a flop, plain and simple.

you mean 200%

On the other hand, the Harry Potter movies depict ghosts and they were released in China.

China only allows 34 foreign films to be screened on the mainland every year; I think they just figured there's not much of a Ghostbusters audience so why waste a slot.

I said make even, not being profitable