It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 03 Aug 2016, 14:08

thoreau wrote:But that has nothing to do with "Ew! They let girls into the clubhouse!"
I still detect a very strong whiff of "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering." Ghostbusters are supposed to be men, and any deviation from that better have a damned good excuse -- with the validity of said excuse to be judged by those who believe Ghostbusters are supposed to be men.

See also the earlier brouhaha over the toys marketed for the new Star Wars: Rey, the female main character, was not included in Star Wars Monopoly or various Star Wars playsets -- and when various women and girls (alongside some male parents of same) complained "Hey, where are the girl toys?" that too was dismissed as PC whining -- as opposed to, like, the idea that girls might also be fans of the movie, and even want toys of characters they might pretend to be. Surely, such disagreement with the status quo can only be explained by dishonest PC pandering. When people complained about Gamora action figures being kept out of Guardians of the Galaxy playsets, that too was dismissed as PC whining. Toy versions of male characters are the norm, and any deviation from (or complaints about) that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9984
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Sandy » 03 Aug 2016, 14:33

Jennifer wrote:
thoreau wrote:But that has nothing to do with "Ew! They let girls into the clubhouse!"
I still detect a very strong whiff of "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering." Ghostbusters are supposed to be men, and any deviation from that better have a damned good excuse -- with the validity of said excuse to be judged by those who believe Ghostbusters are supposed to be men.
Then why is Rogue One not getting panned into oblivion? Or Wonder Woman? If it's just about "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering," those would get disliked/blasted for "deviating from the norm ew girls gross".

It's almost like the media played up a controversy for clicks instead of telling a more nuanced story. Kinda like the Boycott Star Wars because ew blacks thing that turned out to be absolutely nothing.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9984
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Sandy » 03 Aug 2016, 14:37

Mo wrote:
Sandy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
thoreau wrote:Eh, the 2004 internet wasn't exactly primitive. Yes, the current favorite sites weren't around, but there were plenty of places for people to whine and flame even in the quaint era of windmill-powered internet that was 2004.
Sure, but nothing remotely along the lines of "Mainstream media turns today's Twitter trend into an actual story." I first learned of the racist "Boycott Star Wars" movement and the "Whaddaya mean, the upcoming Ghostbusters won't have dicks?!?" outcry by reading news sites, not social media.
Isn't that saying more about the media than the internet?
It says more about media consumers than the media.
Maybe. But because Satanic Cult Worship stories sold in the 80s didn't make Satanic Cults actually exist.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3679
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Painboy » 03 Aug 2016, 15:22

Jennifer wrote:
thoreau wrote:But that has nothing to do with "Ew! They let girls into the clubhouse!"
I still detect a very strong whiff of "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering." Ghostbusters are supposed to be men, and any deviation from that better have a damned good excuse -- with the validity of said excuse to be judged by those who believe Ghostbusters are supposed to be men.

See also the earlier brouhaha over the toys marketed for the new Star Wars: Rey, the female main character, was not included in Star Wars Monopoly or various Star Wars playsets -- and when various women and girls (alongside some male parents of same) complained "Hey, where are the girl toys?" that too was dismissed as PC whining -- as opposed to, like, the idea that girls might also be fans of the movie, and even want toys of characters they might pretend to be. Surely, such disagreement with the status quo can only be explained by dishonest PC pandering. When people complained about Gamora action figures being kept out of Guardians of the Galaxy playsets, that too was dismissed as PC whining. Toy versions of male characters are the norm, and any deviation from (or complaints about) that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering.
The strawmen are all dead you can put down the flamethrower.

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 03 Aug 2016, 15:52

Sandy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
thoreau wrote:But that has nothing to do with "Ew! They let girls into the clubhouse!"
I still detect a very strong whiff of "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering." Ghostbusters are supposed to be men, and any deviation from that better have a damned good excuse -- with the validity of said excuse to be judged by those who believe Ghostbusters are supposed to be men.
Then why is Rogue One not getting panned into oblivion? Or Wonder Woman?
Wonder Woman's non-maleness is, arguably, baked right in to her name.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 03 Aug 2016, 15:55

Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
thoreau wrote:But that has nothing to do with "Ew! They let girls into the clubhouse!"
I still detect a very strong whiff of "Men are the norm, and any deviation from that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering." Ghostbusters are supposed to be men, and any deviation from that better have a damned good excuse -- with the validity of said excuse to be judged by those who believe Ghostbusters are supposed to be men.

See also the earlier brouhaha over the toys marketed for the new Star Wars: Rey, the female main character, was not included in Star Wars Monopoly or various Star Wars playsets -- and when various women and girls (alongside some male parents of same) complained "Hey, where are the girl toys?" that too was dismissed as PC whining -- as opposed to, like, the idea that girls might also be fans of the movie, and even want toys of characters they might pretend to be. Surely, such disagreement with the status quo can only be explained by dishonest PC pandering. When people complained about Gamora action figures being kept out of Guardians of the Galaxy playsets, that too was dismissed as PC whining. Toy versions of male characters are the norm, and any deviation from (or complaints about) that norm can only be due to dishonest PC pandering.
The strawmen are all dead you can put down the flamethrower.
What strawmen? People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism (as opposed to, you know, actually wanting a greater variety of toys). It's like, defenders of the status quo view themselves as reasonable and non-biased, but any attempt to change that status quo -- even as mild as "Hey, you know, girls also watch these movies and would like to play with toys based on them" -- is immediately tarred with the "PC bias" brush.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3679
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Painboy » 03 Aug 2016, 16:09

Jennifer wrote: People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism
It started because some people accused the toy company of deliberately keeping the Rey figure out of one boxed game. Those people were the first people making accusations. When the company said it was just a snafu they were accused of lying. There was never any evidence that the company deliberately kept her out. So yes there was a rather ridiculous PC overreaction because there was no evidence to support their claims. Some people accordingly called them out on that.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 12338
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Eric the .5b » 03 Aug 2016, 16:14

At this point, I wonder how many tickets have been sold by the backlash.

After all, it was a forum thread with a bunch of emotionally incontinent Europeans horrified by the idea of someone just carrying a knife, even a pocket knife, that got me to look into and buy a Swiss Army Knife. Movie tickets are still cheaper than a decent knife, and those Europeans weren't freaking out for weeks all over Twitter and whatnot.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
"Cyberpunk never really gave the government enough credit for their ability to secure a favorable prenup during the Corporate-State wedding." - Shem

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 03 Aug 2016, 16:17

Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote: People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism
It started because some people accused the toy company of deliberately keeping the Rey figure out of one boxed game. Those people were the first people making accusations. When the company said it was just a snafu they were accused of lying.
In part because it later came out that the company did allegedly make a deliberate "marketing decision" to keep out the girl-toys, remember? (Plus, at least regarding the Monopoly game, the original justification for keeping Rey out was not "Oops, merely an oversight on our part," but the obvious bullshit "But ... but ... if we had a Rey-shaped game piece, that would've given away major plot points of the movie!")
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3679
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Painboy » 03 Aug 2016, 17:19

Jennifer wrote:
Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote: People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism
It started because some people accused the toy company of deliberately keeping the Rey figure out of one boxed game. Those people were the first people making accusations. When the company said it was just a snafu they were accused of lying.
In part because it later came out that the company did allegedly make a deliberate "marketing decision" to keep out the girl-toys, remember? (Plus, at least regarding the Monopoly game, the original justification for keeping Rey out was not "Oops, merely an oversight on our part," but the obvious bullshit "But ... but ... if we had a Rey-shaped game piece, that would've given away major plot points of the movie!")
That entire article is hearsay.

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9984
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Sandy » 03 Aug 2016, 17:21

the innominate one wrote:
the innominate one wrote:
dbcooper wrote:The Red Letter Media videos were amusing, so that's as good as it gets for me.
Scientist man video or half in the bag #112? Or both?
I've watched both and they are way too long; in the former, just posted today, the analysis should be bolted to a proton pack, and that pack should be used with another pack to cross the streams so that the analysis is utterly destroyed and erased from our universe.
I just watched it. What was wrong with it?
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 03 Aug 2016, 17:56

Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote: People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism
It started because some people accused the toy company of deliberately keeping the Rey figure out of one boxed game. Those people were the first people making accusations. When the company said it was just a snafu they were accused of lying.
In part because it later came out that the company did allegedly make a deliberate "marketing decision" to keep out the girl-toys, remember? (Plus, at least regarding the Monopoly game, the original justification for keeping Rey out was not "Oops, merely an oversight on our part," but the obvious bullshit "But ... but ... if we had a Rey-shaped game piece, that would've given away major plot points of the movie!")
That entire article is hearsay.
The claim that Hasbro's initial excuse for leaving out Rey was not an "oversight," but a deliberate choice backed up by the lame excuse "Oh, well, a Rey character game piece would've given away movie spoilers!" was not hearsay, but an actual Hasbro statement.

But I'd forgotten: when this topic first came up, you were one of the people arguing that the exclusion of female-character toys from movie playsets was a sensible business practice, and those who complained were just PC whiners, right? Had I remembered that in the first place, I'd not have raised the issue again in this thread.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 12356
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by the innominate one » 03 Aug 2016, 19:47

You guys are still on this, huh?
thoreau wrote:
the innominate one wrote:
thoreau wrote:Is there a way to do a reboot/remake with character genders changed without it being seen as gimmicky or PC run amok or whatever?
Yes, I suggested one for this specific movie. But thanks for pretending otherwise.
I'm not seeing how making them the daughters of the original Ghostbusters is any less gimmicky or PC or whatever than just doing a reboot. Either way they clearly want to have an all-female team, the only difference is whether to start the story fresh or commit themselves to continuity.
Maybe it wouldn't be less gimmicky. It was a suggestion. I suggest it would be perceived as less gimmicky because it provides a reason within the context of an existing story that all the Ghostbusters would be female, as already stated. More than once, I believe. You may disagree, but you can't say I am inherently opposed to having female characters be Ghostbusters, as 1. I don't actually care strongly about the issue, I care strongly whether I'm being misunderstood/misrepresented. 2. I suggested an alternative scenario for an all female team that might have been more palatable and plausible.
Sandy wrote:
the innominate one wrote:
the innominate one wrote:
dbcooper wrote:The Red Letter Media videos were amusing, so that's as good as it gets for me.
Scientist man video or half in the bag #112? Or both?
I've watched both and they are way too long; in the former, just posted today, the analysis should be bolted to a proton pack, and that pack should be used with another pack to cross the streams so that the analysis is utterly destroyed and erased from our universe.
I just watched it. What was wrong with it?
In the scientist man video the analysis of sampling negative sexist comments and extrapolating to the number of views of the trailer is obviously a problem. Each view doesn't necessarily correspond to a single viewer. People may watch in pairs or groups, or single individuals may watch the trailer more than once. A better measure, though still imperfect, would be the number of individuals making sexist comments uniquely identified by their handle/username divided by the total number of uniquely identified individuals in the sample, and just leave it as a percentage. Don't try to extrapolate to some unknowable number of unique commenters nor to the unknowable number of viewers based on the view numbers of the trailer.

I have no opinion on their opinion on the content and execution of the movie itself.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Kolohe
Posts: 13438
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:51

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Kolohe » 03 Aug 2016, 19:50

Sandy wrote:
D.A. Ridgely wrote:
thoreau wrote:Is there a way to do a reboot/remake with character genders changed without it being seen as gimmicky or PC run amok or whatever?
The Powerpuff Boys?
I predict that this and Sex in the City--this time with teh MENZ! will get no pushback and bland acceptance from everyone. Absolutely no one will go apeshit because they have the wrong pee-pee.
Sex in the City gender flipped was called Entourage.
when you wake up as the queen of the n=1 kingdom and mount your steed non sequiturius, do you look out upon all you survey and think “damn, it feels good to be a green idea sleeping furiously?" - dhex

User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 3679
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Painboy » 03 Aug 2016, 19:55

Jennifer wrote:
Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
Painboy wrote:
Jennifer wrote: People really did complain about the lack of toys relating to female characters, and those who complained really were accused of knee-jerk PCism
It started because some people accused the toy company of deliberately keeping the Rey figure out of one boxed game. Those people were the first people making accusations. When the company said it was just a snafu they were accused of lying.
In part because it later came out that the company did allegedly make a deliberate "marketing decision" to keep out the girl-toys, remember? (Plus, at least regarding the Monopoly game, the original justification for keeping Rey out was not "Oops, merely an oversight on our part," but the obvious bullshit "But ... but ... if we had a Rey-shaped game piece, that would've given away major plot points of the movie!")
That entire article is hearsay.
The claim that Hasbro's initial excuse for leaving out Rey was not an "oversight," but a deliberate choice backed up by the lame excuse "Oh, well, a Rey character game piece would've given away movie spoilers!" was not hearsay, but an actual Hasbro statement.

But I'd forgotten: when this topic first came up, you were one of the people arguing that the exclusion of female-character toys from movie playsets was a sensible business practice, and those who complained were just PC whiners, right? Had I remembered that in the first place, I'd not have raised the issue again in this thread.
And you continue to twist what I say around. I'm not biting this time.

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9984
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Sandy » 03 Aug 2016, 20:46

the innominate one wrote:In the scientist man video the analysis of sampling negative sexist comments and extrapolating to the number of views of the trailer is obviously a problem. Each view doesn't necessarily correspond to a single viewer. People may watch in pairs or groups, or single individuals may watch the trailer more than once. A better measure, though still imperfect, would be the number of individuals making sexist comments uniquely identified by their handle/username divided by the total number of uniquely identified individuals in the sample, and just leave it as a percentage. Don't try to extrapolate to some unknowable number of unique commenters nor to the unknowable number of viewers based on the view numbers of the trailer.

I have no opinion on their opinion on the content and execution of the movie itself.
That was one of just several numbers, though, and they confirmed that Sony was caught deleting negative but not-sexist comments. Even so, the share specifically mentioning women or feminism was 12%. I think comparing it to downvotes/upvotes is viable, however, because each account can only down/upvote once.

Clearly the studio didn't seem to have a lot of confidence in the quality of it. I guess a controversy + meh is better than just meh.

I'm still wondering where the backlash against Rogue One is.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 22536
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by JasonL » 03 Aug 2016, 20:51

I kinda wish this thread title were less explicit. Makes perusing the whole joys of life section awkward at work.

User avatar
the innominate one
Posts: 12356
Joined: 17 May 2011, 16:17
Location: hypertime continuum

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by the innominate one » 03 Aug 2016, 23:22

Sandy wrote:
the innominate one wrote:In the scientist man video the analysis of sampling negative sexist comments and extrapolating to the number of views of the trailer is obviously a problem. Each view doesn't necessarily correspond to a single viewer. People may watch in pairs or groups, or single individuals may watch the trailer more than once. A better measure, though still imperfect, would be the number of individuals making sexist comments uniquely identified by their handle/username divided by the total number of uniquely identified individuals in the sample, and just leave it as a percentage. Don't try to extrapolate to some unknowable number of unique commenters nor to the unknowable number of viewers based on the view numbers of the trailer.

I have no opinion on their opinion on the content and execution of the movie itself.
That was one of just several numbers*, though, and they confirmed** that Sony was caught deleting negative but not-sexist comments. Even so, the share specifically mentioning women or feminism was 12%***. I think comparing it to downvotes/upvotes is viable****, however, because each account can only down/upvote once.

Clearly the studio didn't seem to have a lot of confidence in the quality of it. I guess a controversy + meh is better than just meh.

I'm still wondering where the backlash against Rogue One is.
*True, but I don't have the patience to sit through b.s. statistics to sift out the valid statistics, especially in an already overlong and not especially entertaining video.
**confirmed, or repeated an allegation?
***12% of comments or 12% of commenters? If anything, the former could overestimate the fraction of individuals opposed on ideological or sexist grounds.
****if they took the fraction of commenters (not comments) who posted sexist comments and multiplied that fraction by the number of downvotes, that would be reasonable. Multiplying by views and pretending it's the number of sexist viewers is not reasonable.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." -E Benn

"No shit, Sherlock." -JsubD

"now is the time to go fuck yourself until you die." -dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 14513
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Aresen » 03 Aug 2016, 23:59

Painboy wrote:The original BSG, while fondly remembered by some braindead morons.
Fixed
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 24424
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Warren » 04 Aug 2016, 00:04

Aresen wrote:
Painboy wrote:The original BSG, while fondly remembered by some braindead morons.
Fixed
If you're going to quote someone from another thread or previous page, FFS provide a link.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9984
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Sandy » 04 Aug 2016, 02:10

Aresen wrote:
Painboy wrote:The original BSG, while fondly remembered by some braindead morons.
Fixed
The first half of it was gold. Plus they had boss hair.

And they dealt with women in combat. In 1978.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 22647
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Jennifer » 04 Aug 2016, 11:46

Kolohe wrote:
Sandy wrote:
D.A. Ridgely wrote:
thoreau wrote:Is there a way to do a reboot/remake with character genders changed without it being seen as gimmicky or PC run amok or whatever?
The Powerpuff Boys?
I predict that this and Sex in the City--this time with teh MENZ! will get no pushback and bland acceptance from everyone. Absolutely no one will go apeshit because they have the wrong pee-pee.
Sex in the City gender flipped was called Entourage.
If they did an all-male version of Sex and the City starring four fashion-obsessed bubbleheads, that would be freaking hilarious.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Kolohe
Posts: 13438
Joined: 06 May 2010, 10:51

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Kolohe » 04 Aug 2016, 11:49

Again, I don't think "4 fashion obsessed bubble heads" is a mis-characterization of Entourage. Those bros were all about image.
when you wake up as the queen of the n=1 kingdom and mount your steed non sequiturius, do you look out upon all you survey and think “damn, it feels good to be a green idea sleeping furiously?" - dhex

User avatar
dhex
Posts: 15427
Joined: 05 May 2010, 16:05
Location: 'murica

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by dhex » 04 Aug 2016, 11:49

Sandy wrote:
dhex wrote:looking or queer as folk is essentially satc with men, which itself was degrassi high with more salad tossing.

eta: people should probably take entertainment less seriously.

eta2.0: gb already fucked itself up. it was called ghostbusters 2. there was nothing left to ruin.
I didn't mind it. It wasn't as good as the first one, but it gave us Peter MacNicol.
have you tried watching it recently? ghostbusters hasn't aged that well, but it's properly paced. (the succubus bj scene is kinda...yeah)

i tried watching a bit of gb2 last night on youtube...it went poorly.
"I do wear my New Balance tennis shoes when I'm wearing cargo shorts, though, because truth in advertising." - lunch

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 11416
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: It's true, Your Honor; these Ghostbusters have no dicks.

Post by Ellie » 04 Aug 2016, 12:45

dhex wrote: ghostbusters hasn't aged that well, but it's properly paced. (the succubus bj scene is kinda...yeah)
This is EXACTLY what i was thinking about OG GB while watching the new one. Oh my goodness, I agree with dhex! This is such a weird feeling! I better go listen to some Decemberists!
"NB stands for nota bene do not @ me" - nicole

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests