Are these female lead remakes are getting out of hand now?

Tools    





Welcome to the human race...
Not weird. Realistic.
We're talking about a property centred around the idea that not only do ghosts exist but that a handful of modern human scientists have invented a means of capturing and imprisoning them, yet somehow the possibility that said scientists might turn out to be female is the unrealistic part? Like in the original, they know how to catch ghosts for real and they're also broke so it doesn't exactly take crazy male genius to realise that they can use it to make a living.

But the filmmakers of TGTBATU are Italian, in an Italian film industry and Italian people have latin mixed in with them as well. So why would they aim to make Tuco dumb, because he is Latino if that's the case?
*shrug* I don't know, man, you can either take it up with seanc (who insinuated this line of reasoning in the first place) or just accept that the filmmakers didn't know or didn't care too much about what they were doing in this regard.

This thread, man.
Tell me about it.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



We're talking about a property centred around the idea that not only do ghosts exist but that a handful of modern human scientists have invented a means of capturing and imprisoning them, yet somehow the possibility that said scientists might turn out to be female is the unrealistic part? Like in the original, they know how to catch ghosts for real and they're also broke so it doesn't exactly take crazy male genius to realise that they can use it to make a living.
Maybe it's plausible for women to open up a paranormal activity detection service (something that would likely appeal more to men anyhow), but implausible that they would call themselves the Ghostbusters, buy a used police car, spend time and money inventing "proton packs", so on and so forth. Maybe I should have specified that it's hard for me to picture relatively normal women in such a scenario. That's why the remake was trashed and burned, because it was so awkward and forced. It's such a politically correct, hipster-y, nerdy remake. The guys however were everyday fellas aside from their occupational interests. It looked natural. Let me provide a picture to support my argument. The second pic looks like a poster for a cheap Marvel movie.





There's some remakes that wouldn't work or aren't believable today simply because of technological changes. Blair Witch Project? GPS. Ghostbusters? "Let me take a selfie with the ghost before you capture it!". Random slasher where killer cuts off the phone line? Cellphone. Anything with muggings or unmasked robberies? Cellphone video.



Welcome to the human race...
It seems like an extremely arbitrary distinction to say the original Ghostbusters were all just regular dudes when I'd contest that Venkman and Zeddemore were the "normal" ones (and as a result were shown to not take the matter all that seriously e.g. Venkman doing the shock test or Zeddemore going "as long as there's a paycheck") compared to the obsessive academics Spengler and Stantz, and even then how much of a glimpse do we really get at their exterior lives in either case to show how "normal" any of them are? Like somehow all of them moving into a run-down firehouse to run their business is just a thing that ordinary guys will do at a moment's notice? As a result, I never had trouble accepting the premise that there might be a grand total of four women who'd end up doing the same thing (and the idea of complaining about it being "nerdy" is especially rich).

As for remakes that couldn't work because of subsequent advances in modern technology, I mean, they do still make movies (original or remake) that involve and thus write around such technology - how often have you seen a movie where the characters can't use their phone to call for help because there's no reception or the battery ran out or the villain is jamming their signal?



It seems like an extremely arbitrary distinction to say the original Ghostbusters were all just regular dudes when I'd contest that Venkman and Zeddemore were the "normal" ones (and as a result were shown to not take the matter all that seriously e.g. Venkman doing the shock test or Zeddemore going "as long as there's a paycheck") compared to the obsessive academics Spengler and Stantz, and even then how much of a glimpse do we really get at their exterior lives in either case to show how "normal" any of them are? Like somehow all of them moving into a run-down firehouse to run their business is just a thing that ordinary guys will do at a moment's notice? As a result, I never had trouble accepting the premise that there might be a grand total of four women who'd end up doing the same thing (and the idea of complaining about it being "nerdy" is especially rich).

As for remakes that couldn't work because of subsequent advances in modern technology, I mean, they do still make movies (original or remake) that involve and thus write around such technology - how often have you seen a movie where the characters can't use their phone to call for help because there's no reception or the battery ran out or the villain is jamming their signal?

We're just going to have to agree to disagree about Ghostbusters. As for remakes, there's only so many times they can use the "dead battery" or "no reception" excuse. It would have to be virtually in every modern horror; otherwise, calls would be made and nothing further would happen. Just a situation of "getting lost" is so much harder to make believable these days. I can imagine a modern horror where everyone splits up and can't find one another. Someone then sends out a group text. Problem solved.

Did anyone see the remake of Death Wish? I can't imagine how it went. Just the subway mugging in the original would be impossible. Within hours, the internet would be flooded with cellphone videos and pictures of the incident. He'd be caught; the end.



Welcome to the human race...
I mean, it's not like such phone problems are without precedence in reality, and besides which certain movies will try to rationalise it like through magic curses (like in the Blair Witch sequel that came out a couple of years ago revealing that the woods were cursed all along) or the villain managing to jam the signal (which I believe happened in Mike Flanagan's Hush). That's supposed to be where the horror sets in - when the obvious solution out of the horror simply doesn't work.

I did see the remake of Death Wish and (minor spoilers if you haven't seen it, I guess) the main character's first attempt at shooting criminals does end up being captured on video and going viral online, but he gets away with it since he's wearing a hoodie and his face can't be seen on the video.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
I am going to try to watch all of the new Ghostbusters and give it a chance. The thing that bumbs me out about it, is that Kristen Wiig is just not funny in the same league as Bill Murray for me. But I will see.



Welcome to the human race...
I think I found it easier to like because I wasn't all that fond of the original in the first place (and I'm in the minority in thinking that Bill Murray's character was more annoying than anything else, which is a problem when he's so integral to what makes the movie work).



I finally watched the new "Ghostbusters" recently. I didn't hate it but it wasn't my cup of tea. I think it was because they just talked too much. I see that in other new comedies. The writers just try too hard and often beat a joke to death. With the original, there was a setup for the joke, the joke and then they moved on. Does anyone know what I mean?
I was open to the idea of them being women. But I'm not sure, except perhaps for Kristen Wiig, the characters' perspectives were much different from the males.
I think a lot of people overreacted to the news the new cast would be women. But I think the folks behind the sequel didn't understand how popular "Ghostbusters" is, even after all these years, with kids and especially boys. I don't think there was a strong interest in the sequel from women. Any women care to comment?



If you all feel this way.. then how about Hollywood stop making American remakes of foreign films.. Its pretty much the same sh*t...

Hell the Argentine version is a lot better than the American remake of "El Secreto de Sus Ojos".

and seriously, if you dont watch foreign films.. you really have no say in this...

better yet, lets remake these movies with a gay cast...

I would say that the problem is that Hollywood does not want to risk money on new ideas or stories for films whether they have female leads or not. They just are recycling. Worst of all is when they remake a foreign film like City of Angles did for Wings of Desire or create an American release for Cinema Paradiso which cuts 40+ minutes from the original they are saying that Americans no longer have the attention span to let a movie develop its story or characters. If things keep going like this imagine the American film industry in ten or twenty years after they have been marketing their films to the lowest common denominator to ensure the biggest pay-off. Film could be a wonderful art form if they would put a fraction of the money they spend on these blockbusters into a good film. They could still make their blockbusters, but could use the profits to make some quality films.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Speaking of movies making political statements possibly, I was wondering if Forrest Gump was trying to make one after watching it again. In the scene when Lieutenant Dan introduces his fiance, she is of Asian decent, and I wonder if this was some sort statement the filmmakers were trying to make since Dan fought Asians in the Vietnam war. Do you think so, or is it just me?



Speaking of movies making political statements possibly, I was wondering if Forrest Gump was trying to make one after watching it again. In the scene when Lieutenant Dan introduces his fiance, she is of Asian decent, and I wonder if this was some sort statement the filmmakers were trying to make since Dan fought Asians in the Vietnam war. Do you think so, or is it just me?
It's not uncommon for soldiers posted in foreign cultures to become very attracted to the women of the culture. I think that's all it was showing. Same thing happens with men who've been in hospital for a long time developing a fetish for nurses. It's the same thing.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, but was the movie trying to say something about that?



This might just do nobody any good.
“Is this expansive retrospective on the 20th century saying something political?”



The real issue with the Ghostbusters remake I would say was mostly a shift in the tone of the film relative to the original. Whilst that film does obviously have a highly fantastical central conceit to it the style of the film itself is generally pretty down to earth, the humour is mostly in the form of wit and more realistic character foibles. The remake on the other hand is I think something much broader, cheesier and just fundamentally less intelligent.

It came up on that thread a few weeks/months ago with the claim the original was "about nothing" that actually its quite a clever satire on small business and blue collar work. The remake for me is a classic example of less ambitious cinema looking to sell itself on tokenism.



Welcome to the human race...
I think the "about nothing" argument stems from the idea that its supposed thematic concerns don't develop or cohere enough to provide a sufficiently well-rounded subtext, reaching the point where it ends up supporting vastly different interpretations because it's so messy in that regard (and that same lack of clarity would ultimately undermine the strength of its satirical elements).

Contrast Renegade Cut leaning into the Reaganomics/Objectivism angle (which definitely complicates its superficial blue-collar elements)...



...against MovieBob trying to circumvent that (after all, how elitist can the Ghostbusters be if Winston is able to immediately become a full-fledged member?).



Does that necessarily mean the remake is better by sticking to a simpler but much more consistent thematic throughline instead of one that's maybe a little too open to interpretation for its own good? That's a good question that defies easy answers, but again I'm not so fond of either version in the first place so I guess my interest in this is more academic than anything else.



I can’t imagine any situation in which a faction of right-wing fanatics could conceivably return to power through the manipulation of iconography aimed at a younger generation or with the promise of purpose and heroism, even during a time period perceived by many to be an era of peace and progress.

Not. At. All.
Great



The real issue with the Ghostbusters remake I would say was mostly a shift in the tone of the film relative to the original. Whilst that film does obviously have a highly fantastical central conceit to it the style of the film itself is generally pretty down to earth, the humour is mostly in the form of wit and more realistic character foibles. The remake on the other hand is I think something much broader, cheesier and just fundamentally less intelligent.

It came up on that thread a few weeks/months ago with the claim the original was "about nothing" that actually its quite a clever satire on small business and blue collar work. The remake for me is a classic example of less ambitious cinema looking to less itself on tokenism.
I haven't seen the remake yet but I agree with all your points about the original here, especially the down-to-earth and realistic approach.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
I also read that there is going to be remake of Cliffhanger, with the main character changed to a female now. Well if Hollywood wants to have female lead remakes, instead of remaking movies that have had male characters in before, why not remake movies that have already had female protagonists, instead of taking movies with male protagonists and changing them?

Like there are plenty of older movies with female characters in already, like Set it Off, or Thelma and Louise, etc. So why not remake those, instead of changing male characters to female in remakes, which comes off like some sort of gimmicky payback, unless I'm wrong.



I think the "about nothing" argument stems from the idea that its supposed thematic concerns don't develop or cohere enough to provide a sufficiently well-rounded subtext, reaching the point where it ends up supporting vastly different interpretations because it's so messy in that regard (and that same lack of clarity would ultimately undermine the strength of its satirical elements).

Contrast Renegade Cut leaning into the Reaganomics/Objectivism angle (which definitely complicates its superficial blue-collar elements)...



...against MovieBob trying to circumvent that (after all, how elitist can the Ghostbusters be if Winston is able to immediately become a full-fledged member?).



Does that necessarily mean the remake is better by sticking to a simpler but much more consistent thematic throughline instead of one that's maybe a little too open to interpretation for its own good? That's a good question that defies easy answers, but again I'm not so fond of either version in the first place so I guess my interest in this is more academic than anything else.
Most of the comments I'v seen don't seem to go beyond simply stating it has no meaning at all because it doesn't conform to a standard character arc. Really I think this is the result of a lot of commenters these days glorifying rather simplistic film making as an effective way to target the lowest common denominator.

Of course Ghostbusters really is mostly concerned with entertainment which as I stated I think the original carries off far more successfully whilst the remake attempts to parody its style ala JJ Abrams whilst also IMHO being fundamentally less intelligent and well made(also ala JJ Abrams). Still though I think its politics is a more interesting and intelligent mix than a standard simplistic and ham fisted action blockbuster message, as evidence by it inspiring such videos.

I don't think that's automatically the product of it being recast as "all female", it would/could have been perfectly possible to make a film as well done and intelligent as the original whilst also making comment on gender issues, something like say Fury Road is I think just as good or better than the originals whilst doing so(indeed with vastly more weight). That said I do think we see an environment today were Hollywood has viewed such political issues as a bit of a cheap sell just indeed as it views nostalgia for existing franchises in the same fashion.