Nothing would be lost by disabling comments for all YouTube videos. Feminist Frequency and others realized this some time ago.
I watched the original Ghostbusters this morning for the first time and I don't understand what is so spectacular about it. Not only was it completely unfunny, but it was also painfully boring.
Not sure how long it's been available but just noticed The Real Ghostbusters cartoon from the 80s is now streaming on Netflix
Just started streaming this month. This cartoon is so badass. Peter is hilarious in the early seasons.
I honestly didn't really like the Plinkett review. Felt like all it did was point out the obvious and didn't really offer a unique critique or take on it.
I think the problem is that there isn't a lot to say that hasn't already been said. Its clear that there were a ton of issues with the film outside of the initial reaction to the trailers, but its been run through the ringer enough. Their Half in the Bag is pretty perfect though.
Exactly. Not sure why they chose to review it in this context. I haven't watched that HITB in awhile, but I don't remember having any issues with it.
Plinkett's points about the differences in humor style, how crafted jokes work better in a sci-fi comedy than improv, and the actual side-by-side contrasts of the original's tone/pacing with the new one were all really well done. I thought how he, for example, reconstructed the subway scene without the needless dialogue was pretty good, as was how he re-edited the joke about the dead guys' son from the beginning. He really managed to say better than I could what felt "off" about this one. And this is coming from someone who actually relatively enjoyed the film last year. I didn't hate it like a lot of people did. Honestly I didn't think it was that much worse than Ghostbusters II, all things considered.
Minus the re edits, I felt like all those points were obvious and has been said before. I did still enjoy watching the review, but I doubt I will watch it multiple times like I have literally every other one of their reviews.
Maybe it's because I never engaged much with the online criticism of the film when it came out (because so much of it was toxic bullshit, it got exhausting to parse through and find the legitimate criticism), and really haven't thought about it since I saw it last year, but I thought it was decent. Definitely not as good as his Indy 4 or Titanic reviews, though, even though both those reviews also brought up a lot of points that had already generally been made before. And those films were way older in relation to when the review dropped also.
The Plinkett reviews are so rare, and usually go after such iconic cultural touchstones, that it seems so weird to make this review a year later, especially considering how long they are and how much work goes into them. The Ghostbusters movie was not great, but it is not exceptionally bad and "worthy" of such a thorough examination.
The movie was okay. Not awful, but not great. This review basically rehashed what was said already and offered very new input or jokes about it. Just wasn't an impressive output. Kind of wish they just hadn't done it.
I couldn't believe they were actually doing a new Plinkett review considering they just put one out last year about The Force Awakens. I thought they were trolling everyone when they put up that teaser video on Monday.
I mean, I would've obviously rather had them do something else if they were going to do it at all, but that said I'll always take a new Plinkett review if Mike wants to make one.