Why does this have a budget of $144 million? Why was that ever necessary?

Why does this have a budget of $144 million? Why was that ever necessary?

PR cost another 100 million

I saw it last night and I was thinking that the main cast, plus Bill Murray and the ghost special effects, also shooting in New York.

>Sony spent 100 million to purposefully create shit trailers and dump on their core audience

I really don't get it. Surely they must have known that the movie was bad just by reading the script, why would they invest so much money in it?

The movie was just a soulless cashgrab and they clearly knew it from the start, because nobody put effort or talent into it, so why would they gamble so much money into a movie that was probably not going to be successful?

I presume the money was spent mostly on the CGI budget, and then after that paying the lead actresses, Chris Hemsworth, paying for the huge-ass dance number they used in the end credits (lots of costumes and professional dancers needed for that) and the rest went to any on-location filming that needed to be done, which can sometimes get expensive.

Dank CGI
and probably catering

How much did they blow on the song and dance only to cut it?

This movie cost about as much as Jurassic World.

To make it the face for feminism for free feel-good publicity everywhere.

>make bad movie
>"I don't like it"
>"Oh, because you HATE WOMEN, RIGHT!?"

>Why does this have a budget of $144 million?

Melissa McCarthy's catering budget

Desperation, my friend. Sony is losing money and the only division making them money is the PlayStation division. Their movie division really needs s hit since they been having lots of misfires lately. These are the same people who fucked up Spider-Man twice after all.

Even Sony knew that was too dangerous. I suspect that was a pet scene of Feige's though.

How much money do you think it cost them to pay Bill Murray to sit in a chair and boringly mumble a couple lines?

If they're desperate then why would they make a movie that shits all over the nerds who pay multiple times to have multiple viewings of nerd shit? Did they think normies would be having multiple viewings and buying GB merch? It doesn't make sense, it's like they got lost in their own grrrl power propaganda and forgot that you need to actual appeal to an audience.

HEYYOOOOO

...

4 years ago that was true (aside from insurance) but Rich's information is outdated. Sony has done a significant amount of restructuring since then. Their insurance division (which has always been profitable) is making them roughly half of the Playstation division and their Japanese music division is profitable. I'm not entirely sure how their audio hardware or cameras are doing, but they make excellent products their seeing pretty significant growth in photography especially.

They should just sell off their Sony Pictures division (like they did with VAIO and a few others) as it has done nothing but burn money for them.

I thought they would have learnt not to try political stunts to sell a movie after that Seth Rogan Korea disaster.

The cut dance sequence alone was over a million dollars, 2 days of filming, and untold days practicing.

Did you just quote Half in the Bag on purpose?

wew lad

Ah marketing, the black-hole of money for any business.

Didn't they shoot in Boston instead for the tax break?

How can you fail so bad as a writer and director that the entirety of your most expensive sequence ends up on the cutting room floor because people hate it?

How did that shit even make it to the shoot

"hey this was hilarious in the Mask, I'm sure if we copy it it'll be just as good!"

Think studio execs realised that no amount of "we must review this well because the film is IMPORTANT" would stop people wanting to tear out their eyes at that shitty scene.

The head of Sony was a massive SJW and completely incompetent. She gave Feig whatever he wanted and costs spiraled out of control.

This film shouldn't have cost more than $100m to make.

imagine
>trailer group ask for 5 million in making
>do 1 hour work
>give it to Sony execs
>know shit about cinema stuff
>trailer get green lighted
>at least success for the trailer people

I wonder if Feig was involved or saw the trailer.
Wouldnt or shouldnt a director see the pr stuff at least all about trailer?

It really should have been cut in storyboarding when they realized it wouldn't fit with the pacing of the climax and would have cost too much to be worthwhile anyway.

My theory is:

Paul Feig somehow managed to hide the fact that the movie was horrible to Sony until it was too late to fix it.

The original movie was even worse than this one and they cut a lot more scenes than they let on, trying to make the movie less shit in the few time they had, which also explains why Miss Harambe is a lot less annoying in the movie than she appears in the trailer.
They paid extra money to the actors to make them shut up about how much of a disaster the making of this movie was and then they decided that if they wanted the movie not to be a complete disaster they had to spend millions on a viral marketing campaign.

...

I've seen the movie and seen reactions of critics and audience-members who felt different ways, and I legitimately think that Feig and his lead actresses all thought they were making a funny movie that would be the next big hit. The lukewarm-at-best reception has them all somewhat baffled and on the defensive.

If they were laughing the whole time making it, how could it not be funny? Because humor is incredibly relative. If this had been a Judd Apatow joint that went for a hard-R it would have been equally as stupid but I probably would have laughed and enjoyed it more because it was MY kind of stupid. My mom loved this movie but she unironically loves watching Mike and Molly where every other joke is a fat joke that might as well be followed by a tuba noise.

This movie is very funny to some people, just not the same kind of people that found the original ghostbusters funny. I noticed children, old people, and women tended to find it funny while everyone else found it bland and pointless.

hemsworth wasnt in any marketing or was he?
Clever of him or they were afraid he would make fun of the movie as a parody but it should be a serious film.

what if
>feig thinks he should do a parody
>thats why he hires snl actresses
>shows sony they "what is this?
>feig "i do parodies why should you give me this movie and green light the actresses?
>sony damage controll starts

>I legitimately think that Feig and his lead actresses all thought they were making a funny movie that would be the next big hit. The lukewarm-at-best reception has them all somewhat baffled and on the defensive.

This was a picture taken during production. They willingly played identity politics instead of making a good movie. They failed, and now they are crying like little girls.

100% this

That plays into it. They were in a mindset that they were doing it for the right reasons. They bought into their own hype. When people buy into their own hype they start to think they can do no wrong and that all they produce is golden.

dont shame little girls
they are way tougher than what sony or all gb16 involved do at the moment.

The big problem is that Ghostbusters humour was a lot dryer and wittier than this film,

America has lost the ability to do low key humour. Every joke has to be "LOOK, THIS IS A FUNNY THING".

I think it needs Brit comedy to rise again, more Edgar Wright and Richard Curtis films. It's frustrating as fuck that Wright was chucked off of Ant-man because he wanted to do a small scale heist movie whereas Marvel wanted a much bigger (bddum tsh) action series with a larger-than-life comedy side characters. Could have been interesting, ended up being just another standard Marvel film, albeit with a silly 'obscure' hero.

they shot it in boston and got like 10million$ off

PAUL FUCKING FIEG. Sony was banking on him to pull another improv sensation out of his self hating cuck ass. His past films such as Spy, The Heat, and Bridesmaids have destroyed the box office with earnings.

Sony saw him as a revolutionary when it comes to making films for women. Now add that to a already built in audience and factor in name recognition on toy and you should have a moneymaker. The problem is Paul, like many other directors, has no idea what to do with a huge fucking budget.

He spent so much fucking money on unnecessary scenes that didn't work in the film. They just scrapped the scenes instead of trying to salvage them because he has no idea how much CGI costs and was give full creative control when it came to direction. after most of the scenes were canned he then started to reshoot with nothing but the gimmicky improv comedy in front of the camera a schicht that worked so well for him the past.

At least I can now I can safely call Dan Akroid an out of touch cuck. He had a ton of input on this project. I guess Alt-Right faggots are nothing more than 50-60 year old poor men who are part of the KKK. At least his vodka was pretty decent of not sub par.

The movie probably would have done well if it weren't Ghostbusters.

And combine it with the twitter bubble.
I feel it sometimes is criclejerk, they radiate their opinion into the net, but only their follower read it and 80% agree. The other 20% are dead accounts, dont interested or a minority that gets voiced down.
Or who would ever look into #ghostbusters if he isnt already for or against it. Its not something this important that it gets trend for other people.

>built in audience

Which they repeatedly told to fuck off, not to see the movie, and that it wasn't for them.

Can you imagine if they handled Star Wars the same way? "You fucking pissbabies already have 6 movies! This one's not FOR you!"

>His past films such as Spy, The Heat,

The real question Sony should be asking themselves is, how did these movies do so well when they are so terrible?

Moving off topic but the same thing happened with Brexit.

Remain were so into their bubble, so convinced that people would see it their way that they completely ignored the working class that they claimed to be representing.

They were original and didn't shit on an iconic franchise.

And SJWs weren't the driving force behind it.

>"LOOK, THIS IS A FUNNY THING".
Yes, sad this
It has to be bigger.
>TFA a new death star but it must be a bigger one
>ID4:Resurgence an even bigger mothership

>Amy Pascal unironically believed the tumblr crowd were a bankable demographic.

Did you see the size of that ball pit, though?

Apparently, they didn't take Dashcon as an example of Tumblr in action.

Even the fucking bronies manage to pull off successful cons year after year.

>and dump on their core audience

You really think Sony audience is conservative?

And that arrogant overconfidence is what will cost the left elections the west over these next few years

Spy was made watchable by Jason Statham.

Also people pretended that jokes about how frumpy the main character was were completely different from fat joke.

I also don't believe Feig can do humour without being crude.

Yes, he didnt need to apoligize.
But humble say he will make it his way like TFA did and everyone was afraid it will be something that isnt star wars but lensflare.
And not go for controversial shit. Like hating back.
I wonder if this was a pr team idea or feigs idea to salvage on it or both just circle jerk the fans shouldnt say something they are the producers.

The movie was established and green-lit via emails where the execs used emoticons and talked about how every random fart they came up with was a "billion dollar idea". It was a case of yes men, feminist idealism, and horrible decision-making. If anyone ever took control and said "this is shit", it could have been prevented, but Feig is a baby man and can't take criticism. People reported him crying randomly, and he even admitted he cried seeing a paid little girl wearing a home-made ghostbusters uniform. That made him bawl. This is who spent 150 million dollars of Sony's damn money.

Someone used a great phrase to describe it: "The working class hitting back at the smirking class".

You've now got those momentum fuckwits literally destroying the Labour party in order to support an unelectable, incompetent leader.

Labour's going to split into an ultra far left socialist party (that doesn't give a shit about real workers) and a centre left party. Hope you like 15 years of Tories with a massive majority.

Sony's core audience is normies who love lowest common denominator trash like Pixels.

They would probably have liked a lot of this movie if they'd seen it, but the political bullshit scared them off.

>off-topic
its similarities that prove or disprove something.
No problem user.
Good point.

Or they thought in their remain bubble that all will be good, its a homerun and didnt went for vote.

The core audience of Ghostbusters is males... specifically nerdy white males.

Even the original Star Wars movies were only good because of limitations on Lucas, and other writers and directors shutting down his shit ideas. Didn't people say his wife wrote a huge chunk anyway? Regardless, it goes to show that a movie needs resistance to be fine-tuned. If no one speaks up, then a director can run wild and produce a pile of shit.

Rey was kinda shitty, being a Mary Sue who for some reason showed both sets of teeth constantly in a way that seemed to bother me and no one else (no one is that toothy god dammit!"

However it was made up for by Finn being a great character and the director knowing what Star Wars fans want (even if he showed fuck all originality).

feeding the main characters

y sandler movies have big budgets?

Yes

>And SJWs weren't the driving force behind it.
I feel more like other controversial stuff didnt felt forced and overly blund like gb16.

>Playstation Neo will have no games and worse hardware then Nextbox
>So Uncharted or Souls games to keep them afloat

it's gonna be glorious

BREAKING THE CONDITIONING

Pixels was only $88 million. Sandler is a weird figure in hollywood, in that he regularly makes crappy movies, and people expect it and watch them anyway, because 'fuck it', it's Sandler. You know what you're getting into. This Ghostbusters was just a disaster from start to finish, Fanfourstick style.

Director's cut.

Editors in film making have such an important role but get so little recognition. Directors take almost all the credit for it.

Eps 1-3 are a good example, but it's mostly at a script level.

BvsS is probably the worst edited movie I've seen in a long time. Long running plot points that go nowhere (the senator stuff) were the worst thing but little details like Lois lane standing in a grave yard talking to Bruce, Batman then travelling to prison in a different city, travelling back AND LOIS STILL STANDING WHERE SHE WAS.

Sandler coasted a long, long time on goodwill from films that weren't total shit.

I thought he has his own company, so he finances it himself?

>limitation lucas
Yes ford said that he argued with lucas, because a normal human wouldnt talk like that.
As far as i remember they took what harrison wanted to say regarding what lucas wanted to show.

I would never advise someone to go and buy a camera from sony. The only affordable ones for the common pleb and ascendants would be Canon and Nikon. I can't imagine that someone goes and buys their products.

He makes films at a set budget with his own production company. Lots of the money ends up going to his buddies.

However even his shit films make money. Pixels made 240m off of a 90m budget.

Yes Rey was over the top mary sue withall the "but she has limits in certain scenes".
It was acceptable but boy it cotradicted itself that you felt that in certain scenes the character exchanged with the other dimension rey.
Dont complain that you dont use ex machina, but if this makes the character incoherent you as a viewer feel sour.

Since when has Hollywood worked by necessity?

To fix the wage gap duh!

Do you think they were going to pay those powerful, bold, beautiful, strong women of independence LESS than Hemsworth and Murray? Get that patriarchal shit out of my face!

Start with the original Ghostbusters actors' salaries:

Multiply by 0.7

And adjust for inflation.

Money laundering, but you can't do that with ghostbusters, you need a low cost movie with little CGI and other special effects, otherwise you can't overpay the actors.

see >The head of Sony is a massive SJW
It's just that propaganda is priceless.

Just bust my shit up

>Melissa McCarthy made 14 million dollars
>Feig made 10+ million

Related topic:

Money laundry

Can I bring Mike Hat?

Money

Laundering

This is the same group that green lit a video game tie in (isometric, no less) to be sold for fifty dollars. Never underestimate Sony's stupidity.

Slap shot!!!!!!!!

>Finn
>great character
u wot

...

it was $155 before rebates and that's after sony shaved nearly $20m from its production budget

Ghostbusters btfo. Will it ever hit $244 million?

>the best joke is a pun

Always a bad sign.

When the FUCK can we expect a torrent?

money laundering
no movie needs a budget that high

Generous estimates for this weekend domestically are in the 20 million dollar range, and those people seem to be slightly underestimating Ice Age. Sony also front loaded their foreign release schedule with the most favorable markets during the first few weeks.

If Ghostbusters breaks 300 million dollars worldwide, I'd be very surprised.

They probably would have sued Dan if he refused.

Heck, they considered threatening Bill Murry if he refused to be apart of this shitfest. Sony wanted everyone from the old movies to give their endorsement for this shitfest.

never, torrenting is dead

Reminder this fat fuck is just as responsible for this shit as Pascal and Feig are.

Autism is able to organize.

>Our foremothers
>Supernatural Herstory
Nope. No agenda pushing here.