Was he right?

Was he right?

Other urls found in this thread:

tenaflyviper.tumblr.com/post/146914700045/victoriabeckhamncheese-theotakux
youtube.com/watch?v=5ea5jKFGgUw
youtube.com/watch?v=4FShc3zcLBw
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

That the trailer sucked and he didnt want to see the movie because of it and he wasnt going to do a review on it?

Yes.

>if you dislike the new Ghostbusters you're a misogynist
>if you like the new Ghostbusters you're a paid shill cuck
>new Ghostbusters ends up being meh and teenage bois go into damage control mode disliking every reviewer that gave it a positive review

Why do teenage bois rule the internet?

Because we built it.

The Great Triggering of 2016

Yes, of course he was right. Did you really think he would end up being on the wrong side of history?
Apologize.
Apologize right fucking now.

>we

get out

>cheerfully reviews some of the worst shit ever made
>go on record saying he'd watched any Ghostbusters 3 no matter how bad it was
>decides to make a big deal out of this
Posturing hypocrite who just made himself look like a douche

You're telling me you weren't a teenager or younger when you started using the Internet?

Yes.

>decides to make a big deal out of this

tumblr might be more your speed if that's how you interpreted that video

>Was he right?

Nope. He's essentially behaving like a SJW trying to stir up controversy where it's not needed and whining about his feelings. The fact that MRAs and cuckservatives are supporting him is kinda ironic.

Eeyyyy-no.

Ayyyy yes. The truth can be hard to accept, sometimes.

Yes. A few warned us.

>I'm tired of lazy Hollywood reboots of things I love, so I'm not going to see it
>whining about his feelings

Here's your (You)

>not paying to see a bad movie
>controversy

Based Rick

>I can't accept the fact that the new Ghostbusters wasn't terrible so I'm gonna dislike every reviewer that gave it a positive score
>We're not in damage control mode, I swear!

>not paying to see a movie is now a political statement
>the people who complain about consumerism and corporations taking over the world are now their lapdogs because feminism

t. woman

>SJW cucks still mad they took the L on a shitty ghostbusters remake

Shouldn't you be crying about twitter right now @Lesdogg?

>wasn't terrible

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>Honey, I shrunk the Grandkids
seriously, how hasn't that happened yet?

Better than The Matrix and Interstellar if I'm being perfectly honest.

Nah mate it was pretty shit. Jokes were bad, CGI was bad, plot was meh. Just another shitty reboot.

>he'd watched any Ghostbusters 3
Good thing it isn't Ghostbusters 3

Just stop Amy.

(You)

There. Can you go home now?

yes. the movie looked like uninspired, unoriginal drivel

turns out to be just that.

...

No. James is an idiot.

I haven't seen the movie and it looks pretty shitty, but this video was pointless and dumb.

EVER SINCE I LEFT THE CITY

no, hippies built it

Yeah. The movie didn't appeal to him so he instead opted to talk about the tumultuous history of Ghostbusters 3 which never got made. I think opting out of reviewing a bad movie is beyond fair to the filmmakers. I remember many times Roger Ebert opted out of reviewing big budget movies (that sucked). This is actually very diplomatic towards bad movies. There are a lot of undignified journalists out there right now.

If you're reading this, James, I think you took the high ground.

>trying to stir up controversy

All he was making was a quick video for his fans explaining he won't do a review of the new film. That's it. He never intended it to blow up. The media are the ones who over reacted.

This guy is a real human bean, stopped acting to raise his kids after his wife died.

>He didn't acknowledge the backlash in any way.
>He just released his next video on schedule like nothing was going on.
>The money kept rolling.

lmao

Honestly he wasn't right. He should have "caved to the pressure" and gave ghostbusters the trash review that the movie deserved. If femmenazis wanted him thr review the movie so badly, he should have done a 45 minute overview of everything wrong and soulless about the movie.

...

yes
and no

Rick Moranis maybe one of the only people in Hollywood (or was I guess) to have any amount of integrity in him.

I suppose Vigo Mortensen should count as well.

>Taking screencaps of youtube comments.

This is my favorite part, and how you win against the feminazi menace, just ignore them. They can't handle not being the center of attention, starve them off.

...

He's a huge pleb. Always was and always will be. Ghostbusters is right up his alley.

Vigo is my boy.

What did Viggo do so right? Not the Carpathian obviously.

Moranis will go down in history as the most dignified hollywood star since Jimmy Stewart

No, the military built it.

>johncenaateoutmymom

haha what an epic and random name!

MY
FUCKEN
HERO

(((They))) wanted to put him in The Hobbit, but he declined because his character wasn't in the book.

>funny, smart, devoted to family

Great man, Rick

Vigo is my favorite actor by a long shot. He paid his dues, got big, then started getting right picky.

I'd Sudoku if he ever took a capeshit role.

>the hand that feeds you
I wonder if nerds actually have that superiority complex. Irl chad usually has a nice life and has a position of power and because he is sociable and social skill are an important part of the daily routine.

Cup made me think of "Ghostbustiers".

>if you don't like something don't go out of your way to involve yourself with it
pretty sound opinion there. saying 'ignore it' wouldn't even be accurate. You have to actually go out and find this shit.

James seems like such a cool guy. He was what first got me onto youtube 10 years ago. His response to this issue was really ideal.
>thing is out, some people wonder if I'm covering it, I've decided not to. It doesn't look like my kind of thing
Now the internet has still managed to interpret this as something to pick sides on and fight to the death over though.

Maybe people should stop announcing their opinions on volatile topics that they aren't invested in.

>damage control mode

what damage control are they supposed to do considering no one likes it and no one saw it?

>le strawman
At least you gained some upboats x^D

wrong answer
right answers

Yeah, he was spot on. This movie did absolutely nothing good for Ghostbusters and is a chore to sit through. It's not even funny bad. It's just bad. It's boring, the jokes are all flat. The effects are overly bright and the action didn't make sense. The character motivations are confusing, they don't explain anything, and for some reason every single character in this film acts like a complete and utter asshole. Even Hemsworth, who's too stupid to function, ends up being a total dick, but they fawn over him anyway because "muh muscles".

...

>if you dislike the new Ghostbusters you're a misogynist
>if you like the new Ghostbusters you're a paid shill cuck
>new Ghostbusters ends up being meh and sony shills and their sjw allies go into damage control mode claiming teenage bois rule the internet

Why do ShillJWs stay on Sup Forums?

Echo chambers are never good, user. We here at Sup Forums don't believe in the idea of safespaces.

P.S: I'm bringing company

>ImDB ratings don't lie

>73% rotten tomatoes

You mean 50 percent for top critics? It's so fucking obvious people paid for reviews, i have never seen another movie have such a disparity between credible reviewers and the rest.

>Youtube comments
>IMDB ratings
>Rotten Tomaotoes

What are you doing.

I, and I think a lot of people, will be avoiding this movie because of the toxic environment that Sony deliberately cultivated to try to make people buy tickets.

They gave a minority of quotes from the trailer lots of attention to give food to their shills while censoring constructive criticism, forcing the critics to take an active defense and inviting that toxic minority to vomit all over Leslie Jones' twitter page.

And for what? To try to sell tickets.

Sony's behavior does not deserve reward, only condemnation.

>It's so fucking obvious people paid for reviews

What about positive reviews from the critics who weren't paid? Oh wait, you guys are gonna insist those reviewers don't exist. Also, that IMDB ratings distribution implies some real butthurt from the nerds.

www.redditlettermemedia.com

There, is that better?

Explain.

>the toxic environment that Sony deliberately cultivated

see

For every person rating it a 1, there was someone else rating it at 10 because of muh progressiveness. The narrative was more important then the film itself, and that's why its a fucking disaster.

tenaflyviper.tumblr.com/post/146914700045/victoriabeckhamncheese-theotakux

wait, did Kermode go full SJW and think it was good or something?

What's wrong with your faaaace

The Hobbit was 50 years before LOTR, how would that work?

>What's wrong with your faaaace

What is this from?

He had the nerve to say he liked it.

>ClintEastwoodSobbingIntoAmericanFlag.gif

I ain't clickin that shit.. Screencap or something.

You think the filmmakers thought about that?

The actual article links to her sources.

What do you think his best work was? I'd say Little Shop of Horrors.

youtube.com/watch?v=5ea5jKFGgUw

Are you forgetting that Aragorn is 90 years old in LotR?

youtube.com/watch?v=4FShc3zcLBw

>Great review
Much better.

Those are valid reasons why some people dislike the new Ghostbusters. So why are the same people getting so assblasted at any reviewer that gives it a positive review?

>b-but all the positive reviews are paid!

There's no proof of that.

He acknowledged it in an interview with the New York Times. The writer mocked him and made fun of his answers in the article so he was probably misled a bit

>ClintEastwoodSobbingIntoAmericanFlag.gif

name one movie where this happens

I don't know what was more disappointing to me, Pascal hijacking the project right after Ramis' death, or trying to sue Bill Murray into being in this shit. He was on autopilot during the whole thing.

Because all the positive reviews have nothing to do with the movie, but everything to do with smashing patriarchy and that women can be funny.

The review is to push a narrative, not because the movie was good.

Sad.

I think he will find he's on the wrong side of history.

What is absurd about saying "if you are going to insult me in your product than Im going to stop buying it"

>it's an "user pretends he's better than anyone else on Sup Forums episode"

>sjws don't like, maintain, even insist on echo-chambers
Very funny. Go take a look around /qa/ any time of day or night and tell me what you see. There's an army of people who arrived here two years ago max, trying desperately to shut down all forms of "hate speech" on Sup Forums. And that seems semi-reasonable, until you look deeper and realise that by "hate-speech" they mean any and all dissent from their specific, dogmatic narrative.

You know how the general quality of this entire site plummeted a couple of years ago? Notice how it coincided with a sudden outcry against non-PC language and a surge in blatant advertising? The main boards became twice as fast?

No shit you're "bringing company," and your plan is blatantly censorship of dissent so that your masters can shill their mediocre products on here as Anonymous without being constantly called out. Oh you thought it was for the good of humanity that you blue-haired "activists" have all been ordered to silence the "racism" and "misogyny" on here? Nope, you're a corporate puppet, working to turn the internet into ad space.

Enjoy feeling superior to Sup Forums users while you sell your rank, delusional souls you disgusting faggots.

right side*
Sorry, I was distracted by my wife and her bull.

This.

I remember there was a screengrab a while back that showed how many of the positive reviews came from people who had been shilling the movie for months.

>positive reviews from critics who weren't paid

So none of them?

>So why are the same people getting so assblasted at any reviewer that gives it a positive review?

Probably because, overall, the quality of the people reviewing the movies lately has slipped. There were some reviews for GB's that said to the effect "It's got a lot of problems, but the all women cast is something we should encourage. 7.5/10."

That isn't a film review, that's letting a narrative hijack your objectivity. It's happened a lot recently. Go read the RT reviews for London Has Fallen. I'm not saying it was a great movie by any means, but every other review mentioned Trump as some sort of measuring stick for the films quality, or lack thereof.

All of this is irrelevant at this point though. RT and similar sites will continue to be less and less credible, and films like GB's built on a weak foundation of poor marketing/people like Amy Pascal will continue to flounder at the box office.