Ghostbusters Trailer

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ronaldinho
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    I'm not sure if that millennial thing was a crack at me or not. I'm not a millennial. I am, however, a former professional statistician.

    Originally posted by kintnerboy View Post
    I loved Bridesmaids and The Heat, but Ghostbusters was a terrible idea from day one. It would have been a terrible idea with an all male cast as well.
    Honestly, the main thing that was terrible about it was that they spend $150m making it.

    $180m worldwide would have probably been fine if the movie had cost $70m. I mean, not a home-run, but whatever, a reasonably try that landed somewhere in the ballpark of okay. That's not a movie that needs to be that expensive. We're not talking about Pacific Rim, here (you can't make that movie at half its budget).

    THere's a reason the just-announced Ocean's 8 movie has a budget around $70m.

    I don't know anyone who is in love with the idea of branding properties like this - I'd much rather see an original, female-ensemble Ghostbusters-LIKE movie - but for the past few years, very few people have felt they could get anything made without that kind of built-in awareness. So we're going to be stuck like this until audiences start showing up for original material.

    Leave a comment:


  • kintnerboy
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    I love this new Millennial Age rhetoric where people believe that if they quote enough surveys, studies or statistics, somehow their opinions become factual.

    Wrong.

    Your 'data' is meaningless because no matter how badly you want to believe it was compiled by some impartial non-profit third party, it wasn't.

    It's tainted by the biases of whoever commissioned it, and then collected it and then interpreted it.

    Speaking of bias, I noticed there wasn't a single article written about the failure of Disney's BFG this summer. Funny how we try and sweep things under the rug when they don't fit THE NARRATIVE.

    I can just see whoever signed off on that one at the next Disney shareholders meeting, trying to explain that disaster: "But you guys, the DATA the DATA!"

    I loved Bridesmaids and The Heat, but Ghostbusters was a terrible idea from day one. It would have been a terrible idea with an all male cast as well.

    Hopefully next time Paul Feig is out promoting, he will take the high road and keep his mouth shut.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ronaldinho
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    Sadly, it can be inferred from 'hard data' that female-led movies make less money.
    Actually, this is factually incorrect.

    It's very hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison, because, obviously, the same movie doesn't get made and released at the same time with different gendered leads. But, you know:

    http://www.indiewire.com/2015/10/res...-leads-212942/

    Did Hunger Games do less well overseas than "The Dark Knight Rises" because it has a female lead, or because TDKR was bringing the team behind a huge hit back together working with one of the most beloved characters of all time?

    Leave a comment:


  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    Undoubtedly. But that doesn't alter my basic point that Hollywood is a business in a global market which has long and steadfast traditions of misogyny and inequality (Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Third World superstitions, Maoism, Western capitalist prejudice, working class bigotry, etc.) that will not vanish anytime soon. To think that Hollywood would, or could, operate contrary to that 'hard data' seems blindly optimistic - the money men (and women) will not allow it.
    I'm aware that there is a lot of sexism/misogyny internationally. But that doesn't automatically translate into proof that female-led movies don't do as well at the foreign box office because of that factor. If you have hard data showing that, I would love to see it.

    In the meantime, here are some thoughts:

    1) A very likely explanation for a disparity in performance between female-led and male-led films is genre trends. Men are more likely to lead action movies (particularly superhero movies, which dominate nowadays). Action movies are more likely to perform better at the global box office. Therefore, a lot of films successful internationally are male-led because a lot of action-films are male-led. So, you can't just say that male-led films perform better because of a gender bias, because a genre bias is more likely at play.

    Support for this argument? The Hunger Games and Resident Evil are two of the biggest worldwide action franchises -- and are both female-led. In fact, Resident Evil is the most successful movie franchise based on a video game (http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/m...franchises/2/). So gender obviously didn't have an impact.

    2) Venerable stats site FiveThirtyEight indicates that films that pass the Bechdel test perform about as well as films that don't when it comes to foreign grosses. Specifically it says:

    The total median gross return on investment for a film that passed the Bechdel test was $2.68 for each dollar spent. The total median gross return on investment for films that failed was only $2.45 for each dollar spent. And while this might be a side effect of films with lower budgets tending to have higher returns on investment than films with higher budgets, it's still a strong indicator that films with women in somewhat prominent roles are performing well.

    Since Hollywood believes that international markets don't want to see women in film, we also broke down the median return on investment for films based on domestic (U.S. and Canada) and international box office numbers. We found that Bechdel-passing films still have comparable returns on investment when the movies "travel.-

    On the second test, we ran a regression to find out if passing the Bechdel test corresponded to having lower gross profits - domestic and international. Also controlling for the movie's budget, which has a positive and significant relationship to a film's gross profits,8 once again passing the Bechdel test did not have any effect on a film's gross profits.
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...sion-of-women/

    Leave a comment:


  • Crayon
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    If that was satire, then you suck at it.
    Maybe so. Although, I do think it succinctly (albeit crassly) expresses an underlying reason why female-led movies don't get a fair crack at an audience; as well as echoing a point you made earlier - that male-led box office failures may be unfairly immune to gender criticism.

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    You need help.
    Undoubtedly. But that doesn't alter my basic point that Hollywood is a business in a global market which has long and steadfast traditions of misogyny and inequality (Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Third World superstitions, Maoism, Western capitalist prejudice, working class bigotry, etc.) that will not vanish anytime soon. To think that Hollywood would, or could, operate contrary to that 'hard data' seems blindly optimistic - the money men (and women) will not allow it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Crayon
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by figment View Post
    Yes, misogyny is an enduring tradition, like Christmas egg nog and brined turkey at Thanksgiving, it's meant to be cherished and its secrets passed down for future generations.

    HONEY, what the hell are you even talking about?
    I'm talking about gender inequality being ingrained at every level of culture and society because of misogynistic traditions that go back much further, wider and deeper than who cooks the turkey and who carves the turkey.

    Leave a comment:


  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    It wasn't a joke - it was a satirical device to mock masculine dominance and double standards, and to dramatise the blunt point that box office success/failure is as much dependent on the qualities of cinema goers as it is the qualities of a movie.
    If that was satire, then you suck at it.

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    Misogyny is an enduring tradition, and for many (for most?) life is a power struggle - even when it's just a trip to the movies with their significant other.
    You need help.

    Leave a comment:


  • figment
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    Misogyny is an enduring tradition, and for many (for most?) life is a power struggle - even when it's just a trip to the movies with their significant other.
    Yes, misogyny is an enduring tradition, like Christmas egg nog and brined turkey at Thanksgiving, it's meant to be cherished and its secrets passed down for future generations.

    HONEY, what the hell are you even talking about?

    Leave a comment:


  • Crayon
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    Forgive me -- I'm not interested in lessons on misogyny from someone who makes jokes about slapping his girlfriend.
    OK, honey, keep your wig on.

    It wasn't a joke - it was a satirical device to mock masculine dominance and double standards, and to dramatise the blunt point that box office success/failure is as much dependent on the qualities of cinema goers as it is the qualities of a movie.

    Misogyny is an enduring tradition, and for many (for most?) life is a power struggle - even when it's just a trip to the movies with their significant other.

    Leave a comment:


  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Forgive me -- I'm not interested in lessons on misogyny from someone who makes jokes about slapping his girlfriend.

    Originally posted by Crayon View Post
    My stupid girlfriend wanted us to go see that stupid new Ghostbusters movie - so I gave her a damn good slap for neglecting to accept all the bad reviews. After that, she was happy to see Independence Day: Resurgence instead. Good times

    Leave a comment:


  • Crayon
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    Thanks : ) I'm merely a Sir who finds the continuing efforts of men in the industry (and of men who hope to get in the industry) to de-legitimize female-led movies tiresome. Especially when those claims can often be easily debunked with hard data. It's time we evolved already.
    Sadly, it can be inferred from 'hard data' that female-led movies make less money.

    In a global market, movies face global misogyny.

    In one of my two scripts-in-progress - an action fantasy blockbuster - the lead role is female.

    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." ~ Mr Gandhi

    [No-one ever mentions if Mrs Gandhi agreed with that.]

    Leave a comment:


  • Crayon
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by FoxHound View Post
    Maybe it under-preformed overseas because it looked like a stupid movie.
    I've heard that box office takings for the all-girl Ghostbusters have been particularly poor in places such as China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, South Africa, Jamaica, Vatican City, Peru, Philippines, Brisbane, and Texas. Modern, liberal, progressive audiences clearly wanted a much more cerebral script.

    Leave a comment:


  • UpandComing
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by cvolante View Post
    You, Sir or Madam, are rather awesome.
    Thanks : ) I'm merely a Sir who finds the continuing efforts of men in the industry (and of men who hope to get in the industry) to de-legitimize female-led movies tiresome. Especially when those claims can often be easily debunked with hard data. It's time we evolved already.

    Leave a comment:


  • cvolante
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    That is a poorly supported statement.

    1) Ghostbusters is a sequel to a comedy made long ago. So is Zoolander 2, whose original film was much more recent (2001), which should've generated strong interest. Zoolander 2 only made $27.1 million in foreign sales (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=zoolander2.htm). Was that because it was led by a man?

    2) Ghostbusters is an action comedy starring a box office comic star (Melissa McCarthy). So is Central Intelligence (Kevin Hart). Central Intelligence only made $80.1 million in foreign sales (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...elligence.htm). Was that because it was led by men?

    3) Ghostbusters did not get a release in China. Star Trek Beyond (another sequel in a beloved franchise) also hasn't opened in China yet, and its foreign box office is $66.5 million -- about the same as Ghostbusters (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...rtrek2016.htm). Was that because it was led by men?

    The point is, there are several possible factors that may explain why the movie did not perform as well as projected internationally (the fact that it didn't open in China, which drives significant box office; the fact that comedies usually don't perform as well overseas as other genres; and the fact that sequels in general have underperformed this summer). It's kind of lame that you would automatically assume that it's performance is due to the fact that it's led by women. It's kind of lame in general when Hollywood blames a movie's performance on gender.
    You, Sir or Madam, are rather awesome.

    Leave a comment:


  • FoxHound
    replied
    Re: Ghostbusters Trailer

    Maybe it under-preformed overseas because it looked like a stupid movie.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X