@myurbandream / myurbandream.tumblr.com
It’s going to be a bad night.
Look, if it’s a real ghost, the busters get custody. If it’s just a real estate developer in a costume it’s out of their jurisdiction so we gotta hand things off to these meddling kids and their dog.
I think we should all be glad there’s not a 67 Chevy Impala there too.
It’s so weird sometimes reading discourse about media outside of tumblr, because there is this barrier that comes from refusing to see social justice implications that are so god damn apparent. Like when I see people elsewhere saying over and over that Kylo Ren is hugely disappointing because he seemed like a scary badass and it turns out he’s a whiny kid throwing a tantrum, I’m baffled. Because that’s the point???
Because entitlement is terrifying and hurting people isn’t actually cool or manly. Doing horrible grimdark things doesn’t make you an awesome badass; most of the time it makes you a tantrum-throwing child fixated on your own preciousness. The movie just presents that without comment and it’s SO CRAZY to me how many people could watch that and come away from it without understanding what’s so evident.
Like I’m sorry the last several years of television and movies have programmed you to believe that the white boy villain all in black is such a necessary and important fixture that he must be the coolest thing in the entire story, but the fact that Kylo takes his mask off when he’s facing down Rey is not a misstep along the way, it’s the fucking destination. The entire fucking POINT is that he is small and weak while she is awesome and strong. Being a shitty person doesn’t make you more grown up and more of a badass. Doing the right thing makes you awesome in the face of other people’s fuckery.
It’s just so strange that there are people who need to have this explained, I don’t GET it. It feels so fucking blatant.
In the new ghostbusters, too. Hell, they practically spell it out–the scene where he’s going on about how he’s an ignored genius in front of four ignored geniuses that are dismissed by even him because they’re women-doubly so for Patty because she’s black-and even though he’s stolen the work from two of them–and people walked away from that saying “the villain was whiny/terrible” and don’t understand that the scary part of that guy was how common he is.
Hey! Men!
Don’t worry about a lack of representation for dudes in the new Ghostbusters movie guys! You have Chris Hemsworth’s character! He’s a man!
He’s a Strong Male Character, he doesn’t need a woman to make him feel complete! I mean, yeah, he seems to be wearing a lot of unnecessarily tight clothes, but that’s just because he Feels Comfortable In His Own Skin! He’s pretty bright for a dumb blonde to? That makes him super relatable! He’s not a Dude in Distress! He doesn’t need a woman to save him! He is Fiesty! He can Hold His Own against the Ladies! He’s not loud and over bearing, he’s a cool, empowering male character! There may even be some ROMANCE! You guys like romance right? He’s practically one of the girls! He’s just as strong as the women! He’s TECH SUPPORT! THAT’S ALMOST AS GOOD AS BEING A REAL GHOSTBUSTER RIGHT???
But Chris Hemsworth still doesn’t look like a convincing nerd.
You mean glasses and standing near a computer isn’t enough to make him a nerd? He must be a fake nerd guy!
He’s both nerdy tech-support and a model, duh… it just makes him unique. Not like all those avarage-looking nerd stereotypes that men are forced to watch in every other movie. Such a Strong Male Character.
look, honey, men can be smart AND hot. it’s the 21st century!
I’M CHOKING
VENGEANCE IS SWEET
So since the new Ghostbusters came out on blu ray I’ve had two kinds of conversations about it - convos with dudes who didn’t like it and convos with little boys who thought it was awesome.
Like I’m sure there are tons of little girls who love it too, but all the kids I’ve happened to run into and talked about Ghostbusters with happened to be little boys. From kids who’d never seen the first movies so that, for them, the new movie is what “Ghostbusters” means, to little boys who asked excitedly if I’d seen “the girl Ghostbusters” and in the same breath told me how awesome it was.
And it warms my cold, black heart bc like. These little boys haven’t been conditioned to think they can’t relate to women yet. That they can’t enjoy stories that have women as the protagonists. These same boys that relate perfectly well to mutant ninja turtles can also relate to women. Isn’t that amazing.
the problem isn’t ghostbusters, the problem is the inability (or unwillingness) of male audiences to relate to a narrative that is being carried by female characters. male dominated comedy is universal, female dominated comedy is niche and even offensive..like a switch goes off amongst the male audience that says “this isn’t for me, it’s actively excluding me” and they can’t and don’t want to relate to it or consume it anymore. women don’t have this problem bc if we didn’t learn from a young age to relate to stories that exclude us we wouldn’t be able to consume almost any media at all.
tldr; ghostbusters is really good and im salty
“male audiences” - ALSO AT Halalbarbie. MALE AUDIENCES MEANS MEN. And couldn’t see your whole reply to my question because apparently you deleted it. or some shit?
Anyway, just because GB 2016 has a whole female cast doesn’t make it a good movie. Sony should have just left well enough alone and hoped to hell people would go see it instead of trying to force the Feminism thing down peoples throats.
Ummm, normally I don’t jump into a discussion that’s already heated like this, but:
I would genuinely like to know what about the 2016 Ghostbusters movie you thought was bad, or made it objectively a bad movie. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I’ll readily admit it wasn’t perfect, it had some facepalm moments, but those were only small instances in an overall great story. I personally found it to be hilarious, relatable, witty, decently plotted, a good addition to and commentary on the original movie, as realistic as you can get when the movie revolves around pseudoscientific catching of ghosts, and all around a fun, entertaining movie to watch. I’m not seeing any bad points here.
I’m sure it’s an enjoyable movie. And I don’t have a problem with that. It’s just see the same discourse I this post that Sony is using to justify it and it bugs me on an egalitarian level.
So your objection is not about the movie itself, but about Sony’s tactics in promoting the movie? You’re saying the fact that it has an all-female cast does not automatically make it a “good”/enjoyable movie - which is not the same things as saying that you personally think the movie was bad, in and of itself. Correct?
the problem isn’t ghostbusters, the problem is the inability (or unwillingness) of male audiences to relate to a narrative that is being carried by female characters. male dominated comedy is universal, female dominated comedy is niche and even offensive..like a switch goes off amongst the male audience that says “this isn’t for me, it’s actively excluding me” and they can’t and don’t want to relate to it or consume it anymore. women don’t have this problem bc if we didn’t learn from a young age to relate to stories that exclude us we wouldn’t be able to consume almost any media at all.
tldr; ghostbusters is really good and im salty
“male audiences” - ALSO AT Halalbarbie. MALE AUDIENCES MEANS MEN. And couldn’t see your whole reply to my question because apparently you deleted it. or some shit?
Anyway, just because GB 2016 has a whole female cast doesn’t make it a good movie. Sony should have just left well enough alone and hoped to hell people would go see it instead of trying to force the Feminism thing down peoples throats.
Ummm, normally I don’t jump into a discussion that’s already heated like this, but:
I would genuinely like to know what about the 2016 Ghostbusters movie you thought was bad, or made it objectively a bad movie. I thoroughly enjoyed it. I’ll readily admit it wasn’t perfect, it had some facepalm moments, but those were only small instances in an overall great story. I personally found it to be hilarious, relatable, witty, decently plotted, a good addition to and commentary on the original movie, as realistic as you can get when the movie revolves around pseudoscientific catching of ghosts, and all around a fun, entertaining movie to watch. I’m not seeing any bad points here.
the problem isn’t ghostbusters, the problem is the inability (or unwillingness) of male audiences to relate to a narrative that is being carried by female characters. male dominated comedy is universal, female dominated comedy is niche and even offensive..like a switch goes off amongst the male audience that says “this isn’t for me, it’s actively excluding me” and they can’t and don’t want to relate to it or consume it anymore. women don’t have this problem bc if we didn’t learn from a young age to relate to stories that exclude us we wouldn’t be able to consume almost any media at all.
tldr; ghostbusters is really good and im salty
ghostbusters + the onion headlines (1/?)
A Tumblr-less friend posted this theory her husband had. I slammed the headcanon button so hard I should have bought it dinner first.
Thor: Banner, I desire to act like a normal human for a time. How should I accomplish this? Bruce: Well, um, normal people don’t have your speech pattern, for one. They, um, have jobs and hobbies… Thor: Hobbies? Bruce: You know, photography, video games, puzzles… Thor: And how does one acquire a ‘job’? Bruce: Most people use the inter… you should probably look in the classifieds in a newspaper. Also, try shaving the beard and cutting your hair- you’re a bit recognizable. Thor: *sees Superman/Clark Kent costume* A disguise? Like that man? Bruce: Sure, yeah, glasses work.
-later, above a Chinese restaurant-
Thor: Hello? I saw your ad. I’m Kevin.
Wait, Thor can’t be Kevin. Thor loves coffee.
Thor loves coffee. His human persona “Kevin” hates it. So he keeps taking a sip without thinking about it and then going “oh shit I’m supposed to hate coffee” and spitting it back out again.
You cannot tell me that there isn’t a bet amongst him and the avengers on how long the GB are willing to put up with “Kevin”
they ain’t afraid of no ghosts
I’d promised not to do spoilers, but I’m taking a break from that promise to talk about the main villain of Ghostbusters and how anyone saying he’s a bad character is quite simply wrong. Also much talk about Patty Tolan because I see posts about Gilbert’s and Yates’s involvement, but not hers. So, even if I keep things as vague as possible, spoiler warning. (I have tagged this “Ghostbusters spoilers” if you want to quickly blacklist.)
Rowan North is a white man. He is unhappy about life. He considers himself worth more than he gets from the people around him and has experienced bullying. All this has brought him to regard himself with a certain grandeur of the misunderstood genius and if society won’t give him its acknowledgement and praise, then he will destroy society. In the most bombastic way possible literally with his own personal army.
I’m seeing reviews that act like North is not well-motivated. All of the above is all you need to know about the character to understand his motivation and all of it is in the movie, though I concede that one needs contextual understanding to put the pieces together. But every one of us should have that contextual understanding. Are there people who by any chance don’t engage with the news? “Rowan North” is the guy who every half a year or so shoots up a concert, a movie theater, a school, a center, and wherever it is folks gather. Or is this about engaging with the news too much? And what is complained about is the emptiness detected when suddenly the story doesn’t talk about “Rowan North”’s childhood and hobbies.
Like, the concert case? Where North walks casually through the crowd, being greeted and greeting people in return when he’s actually there to kill as many as are going to be caught up in his Day of Reckoning scheme? Not subtle at all. It frightens me there are people who don’t pick up on this. Or demand more of him.
I will keep saying as long as is necessary that the quality of the 2016 movie is to be placed in context of the 80s movies. And if we do that? Gozer is a primordial entity worshipped by the population of the Mediterreanean-Middle East in The Old Days, though somehow is kinda white. Not that the situation would improve with a racially accurate actor, but I’m tired of this reduction of culture to props. It’s so very Lovecraftian (let me tell you about how much I hate that names like “Dagon” and “Tiamat” sooner associate with horror than a beautiful piece of history). Its demigod servants are Zuul and Clortho. Gozer’s storyline is that they’re an ancient evil that wants to kill us all because that’s what ancient evils do. For Gozer to get access to our world, their demigod servants first have to possess two humans, a “gatekeeper” and a “keymaster”, for what is heavily implied to be a ritual involving sex. Because why the heck not. And without consent of the hosts whatsoever.
Vigo the Carpathian is barely better. The Mediterreanean-Middle East is exchanged for neighborino East Europe. “The Carpathian” still sounds nicely “other”. His goal is a reign of terror, somewhat for revenge but mostly because that’s just how he is. He too goes the “minion, get me access to this realm”-route by abducting a baby for body hijacking.
How the bleeping hexagon can you consider either of these two well-written but Rowan North “unfinished” (the people saying this tend to praise the 1984 movie)? North’s the better villain, whether you like the fact he’s a white American man from the present or not. I assume the problem is that the racist & xenophobic fantasy of the inhumane powerful other in the end soundly defeated by the casual-but-secretly-awesome self not only is not applied, but that this round the villain is that casual-but-secretly-awesome self. And this villain could be the person standing next to you and you’re the neighbor who’ll one day be interviewed whether you saw it coming (spoiler: you didn’t), but just as easily it is the person within you. That’s not a story as easy to accept as the dangerous yet inferior foreigner.
There’s probably also something to be said about a reversal of gender and gender performance considering Gozer’s gender-ambiguity and Vigo’s hyper masculinity (I recall him being called butch?) compared to Rowan’s “just a guy” as well as the 1984 gender (performance) dynamics of the heroes vs the 2016 ones, but I’m not the one for that task.
And this is where I’m bringing in Tolan. Admittedly, there’s a note of sympathy to have for North in the sense that you end up asking “Did this have to happen?”. The receptionist and the waitresses paint a lonely picture of rejection, but the concert-goers demolish that picture. And so does Tolan. Because Tolan is like North, “stuck” in an unappreciated job and smart enough to know that maybe they don’t belong there, even if there’s no feasible way onwards. But where North goes for the apocalypse, Tolan doesn’t falter to smile to every patron even if they ignore her. That’s why North talked to her. He sympathizes with her because she’s like him, but she disgusts him because she’s not bitter or vengeful. He literally promises her she’ll be among the last of his victims, getting extra time, but being worthy of death all the same.
Patty Tolan is a black woman. I can’t name a case in which a black woman is the aggressor, but I can name plenty in which they are the victim. Dear Tolan remains polite, not recognizing the danger. She does keep an eye on him for his odd behavior and sees him go on the tracks. Presuming a suicide attempt (I think? If so, foreshadowing), she goes after him herself and that way comes into contact with the paranormal. She survives and keeps control of the situation by getting herself help from experts, thereby being a parallel to Dana Barrett. But where Barrett got the sexualized damsel-in-distress treatment, Tolan takes her steps self-consciously to always be with the situation. She doesn’t send the ghostbusters to the ghost, she takes them to it, and after that joins them on her own initiative and on her own conditions. It is her unique encounter with North that lets her later identify him and get her team to his lair timely. The confrontation is one of multiple stages and one has the ghostbusters offer him sympathy and a way out, which of course he doesn’t take because that’s not what he’s been fantasizing about. And if you’ve seen the movie, you know the rest of the story.
I am not commenting on the matter of Patty having or lacking a degree, because an education would not make it impossible for her to be a subway worker, but Patty being an everyman is of relevance to the story. Because only by being in that unassuming role, she was someone North thought he could vent his arrogance on, which ended up being the biggest mistake in his entire scheme. It bought the ghostbusters time, brought them knowledge, and got them Patty Tolan on their team. If we look at Zeddemore’s role as an everyman in the 1984 movie, then we see someone who does not contribute anything unique in that form. All the role does is create more room for Venkman and, by making Zeddemore join for money and explicitly not genuine commitment, for part of the movie he has this potential to become the traitor hanging over him. This is played up at the end where his “arc” is resolved by him getting enthusiastic about the job. But if anyone is the traitor in the 2016 movie, it is Gilbert, who, despite being the narrative lead, also is opportunistic and selfish until she makes the jump and the one contributing nothing unique. Yates is the core that the others flocked to. Holtzmann is the gadgeteer. And Patty is the perspective. Maybe my memory is failing here, but I can’t think of a thing Gilbert adds that is inherent to her. This doesn’t make Gilbert a bad character, but her personal journey is far more significant to her presence than her team contributions. And from there, notwithstanding that the movie follows Gilbert, notwithstanding what each member of the team had to overcome and accomplished, but Patty Tolan is the hero of the movie. Because she was promised to die and not only she didn’t, but no one else died either thanks to her.
Whether Tolan ultimately is a good character and treated fairly by the narrative is a discussion not for me and larger than the observation I wanted to write down. Feel free to comment. Although I would like to take the moment, speaking as a chemist, to ask people to stop emphasizing that Patty is the only one who isn’t a scientist. Because she’s an historian and I fail to see how someone with my skills would be more “admirable” than someone with Patty’s skills. It’s right to point out how Patty’s differences combined with her being the only non-white ghostbuster are othering, but urgently please put an end to “Scientist > Historian”. As for Rowan North, in short, he’s an excellent villain with clear motivations and I worry about those who act like he isn’t. On an individual level and a societal level.
I’m finally going to see Ghostbusters in the theatre later today and I am SO EXCITED!
Holy shit, the new Ghostbusters movie is HILARIOUS, why the hell does anyone think it's not a good movie??!?!?
I'm finally going to see Ghostbusters in the theatre later today and I am SO EXCITED!
Ghostbusters Remake Now Officially Not a Flop
TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 2016 AT 7 A.M. BY JEF ROUNER
This past weekend the controversial reboot of Ghostbusters finally brought in more money than it cost to make, topping $158 million in total worldwide box office receipts, putting to rest any notions that it would be a flop by not making back its $144 million budget.
“But wait,” a whole lot of dudes who got way too personally invested in seeing the gender-swapped action comedy fail said, “The director said the film would have to make $500 million to make money. It’s never going to do that! (P.S. I’m not sexist).”
American movies do cost a ridiculous amount to market, often more than the film’s production budget. The idea that half a billion dollars is wrapped up in the experiment that is Ghostbusters is perfectly conceivable, and the idea that that money will not all be recouped in ticket sales isn’t far-fetched. However, making that your only measure of success is looking at things in a very narrow way.
Sony is interested in Ghostbusters as a brand, much the way Disney was interested in Star Wars as a brand when they bought the rights for $4 billion from George Lucas even though The Force Awakens brought in only half that in ticket sales. Nobody with any sense would call The Force Awakens a failure, knowing that renewing the film series was basically a license to print money in the form of spin-off media, toys and more.
The same is looking to be true for Ghostbusters. It’s not just a movie, it’s a Top 20 album (No. 1 on the soundtrack charts). It’s a surprisingly successful line of action figures. It’s a bestselling book on Amazon.
Not only that, the rising tide lifts all boats. Know what else is currently a bestseller on Amazon? The original Ghostbusters DVD and its sequel, currently sitting at #38 and #148 respectively. That’s not even counting however many people are streaming them. Renewed interest in Ghostbusters, the brand, is selling a pair of 30-year-old movies like hot cakes and Sony just has to lean back and watch the cash roll in. Heck, the new film isn’t even out on DVD or Blu-Ray yet and IT’S already one of the top-selling movies on Amazon thanks to pre-sales.
Sony has other big plans for the Ghostbusters brand. A new animated television series set in 2050 called Ecto Force is due to arrive in 2018, with Ivan Reitman producing. Sony’s president of worldwide distribution, Rory Bruer, has unofficially confirmed a live action sequel, and we may also be getting an animated movie. That is a lot of Ghostbusters.
The point is that Sony had a lot more riding on Ghostbusters than just a big box office, or they never would have approved that ridiculous budget. When all is said and done at the box office Ghostbusters will maybe not have gotten back every single buck spent making it or selling it in ticket sales, but it will have successfully breathed life into an old property that is making money on everything from fruit juice to children’s books to Halloween cost-OMG THAT IS ADORABLE! It re-affirmed Melissa McCarthy and Paul Fieg as major box office draws, launched Kate McKinnon as everyone’s new favorite comedic actress, and even taking into the mantrum that happens in online movie user ratings, most people enjoyed the film. In short, by every reasonable definition of success, Ghostbusters is one. Period. The end.
ok but listen: the ghostbusters need a lawyer. they need to get a lawyer on retainer asap I mean look at the structural damage they caused without waivers, the exposure of the public to dangerous weapons and all the resulting personal injuries claims, the use of nuclear devices without permits? and they definitely have an employment case against that ass at the start who fired them without notice, without a review or hearing and with verbal assault, also are they being paid? how are they being paid? who did the conveyancing documents for their new headquarters? being fake arrested by police without their permission, that’s false imprisonment and assault, and what about if a whole bunch of people turn around and are like “our aunt wanted US to get the house when she died and we know because she’s angry and haunting us and we want to subpoena the ghostbusters to give evidence” what about then like you’re talking a whole new world of probate law that they could be dragged kicking and screaming into. they really really need a lawyer and all I’m saying is I’m a lawyer and also I want to kiss holtzmann on the mouth.
As a person with a liberal arts degree who basically has never worked in the field for which she studied, I submit to you that Patty Tolan could potentially hold at the very least a Bachelor’s in American History.
Statistically, Black women are the most educated, degree-holding group in America, and STEM degrees are not the only ones that matter.
She could also potentially be an autodidact, but there’s no reason she has to be.
STEM degrees are not the only ones that matter. Those of us with advanced degrees who are underemployed know this. Hell, several STEM degree holders are also underemployed.
Picture Patricia Tolan’s Master thesis on the history of capital punishment in New York being how she identified that ghost in the subway and tell me that isn’t fucking awesome.
She might also have an MA as an architecture historian, which is how she knows so much about specific buildings and their histories
ok but
architecture historian patty tolan predicting the kind of specters that might show up based on the age of the building
architecture historian patty predicting where most ghost activity will be based on which areas are undergoing extreme gentrification, all that ‘renovating’ stirs up a lot of angry ghost energy
patty knowing the escape routes because she’s familiar with the style of architecture and can get everyone out if the ghost gets too hostile
patty being really concerned over the amount of damage their equipment can do to historic structures (and holtz tinkering with it to make them do less damage in the physical world and more to ghosts because she cares about her gf)
patty geeking out when one of the more destructive technologies reveals the original facade of a cool building behind a soulless modern cover
patty being able to calm ghosts down by showing homeowners and renters and landlords what updates to the structure probably got the ghost mad and advising them to get rid of it because its not in the right style anyways
patty going to the archives and doing initial research of a ghost because the archives are cool and its nice to have her hands on original source material again, amazing to be actually using her degree, even if its for something weird and a little scary
I am an autodidact and I really love the idea of Patty being an autodidact BUT with the underrepresentation of educated black women in movies (especially ‘action’ movies or whatver they’re calling Ghostbusters) I am totally one million percent in support of the idea of Patty having an advanced degree which wasn’t able to be turned into a job in her field, and that’s why she works/worked for the MTA.
