Oceans 8

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
It's something I made up, clearly :)

I can dismiss a movie for whatever reason I desire, and I have no desire to see this movie. It's amusing that a single smilie has led to a 'how dare you dismiss this movie' witch hunt. Pretty clear that we're in the pre-free agency period dead zone of the off season :)
No, not really. It was a generic description of your reason not to see this movie that could very easily be used with Black Panther. Just calling out the hypocrisy, that's all.
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
Lol

Like Black Panther does? After all it definitely is riding the coattails of other movies that came before it. I think it’s hilarious that you write polar opposite posts on the same day on the same forum.

I see these as completely different things. One is a studio making more films with already established properties/characters and one is a studio just flipping the gender of characters from previous films it has made.

Marvel has a plethora of established properties/characters from decades of publishing comic books. Most of their heroes have served as Avengers at some point so they essentially have Avengers movies with the individual characters getting their own solo films. They are basically adapting their own source material to films.

On the other hand, what studios have been doing a lot of is just taking a previously released property and tweaking the gender of the main character(s) - usually male roles becoming female roles. Basically, a cheap way to do a remake of sorts. It would be like Marvel saying "Hey, how about we do another Spidey film, but this time Spidey is a girl !!"

Not the same at all, IMHO.

I had no interest in the last Ghostbusters film, but would give this heist film a shot. (I love heist films)
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
I see these as completely different things. One is a studio making more films with already established properties/characters and one is a studio just flipping the gender of characters from previous films it has made.

Marvel has a plethora of established properties/characters from decades of publishing comic books. Most of their heroes have served as Avengers at some point so they essentially have Avengers movies with the individual characters getting their own solo films. They are basically adapting their own source material to films.

On the other hand, what studios have been doing a lot of is just taking a previously released property and tweaking the gender of the main character(s) - usually male roles becoming female roles. Basically, a cheap way to do a remake of sorts. It would be like Marvel saying "Hey, how about we do another Spidey film, but this time Spidey is a girl !!"

Not the same at all, IMHO.

I had no interest in the last Ghostbusters film, but would give this heist film a shot. (I love heist films)
You're missing the point, but ok. This isn't worth discussing anymore.
 

carrrnuttt

Didactic
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
9,292
Reaction score
8,865
Location
Phoenix, AZ

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
No, not really. It was a generic description of your reason not to see this movie that could very easily be used with Black Panther. Just calling out the hypocrisy, that's all.

See BIM's post.

You're missing the point, but ok. This isn't worth discussing anymore.

It wasn't worth discussing in the first place. You got your panties in a bunch because I posted a single emoji in response to a posted movie. I could rant and be an ass about how you're soooooo wrong for not loving Guardians of the Galaxy as much as I do, but that would be stupid, childish, and would serve no purpose. Or as much purpose as all this has served.
 

carrrnuttt

Didactic
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
9,292
Reaction score
8,865
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I posted a single emoji in response to a posted movie.

No you didn't.

You posted MANY other things that gave me the distinct impression that you'd rather not have certain IP's "co-opted" by female-centric storylines.

Considering that none of these IPs A) belong to you, and B) cost you any money, either in producing or paying tickets for, I find extremely funny that you even care enough TO post an emoji. Is it because you LIKE giving the impression that you're a misogynist?
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
No you didn't.

You posted MANY other things that gave me the distinct impression that you'd rather not have certain IP's "co-opted" by female-centric storylines.

Considering that none of these IPs A) belong to you, and B) cost you any money, either in producing or paying tickets for, I find extremely funny that you even care enough TO post an emoji. Is it because you LIKE giving the impression that you're a misogynist?

Stout's been on record for years and years for hating remakes. As a writer himself he feels it is laziness. It's about the process. Change genders, slap a movie together, and voila. He wants more originality and less retreads.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
No you didn't.

You posted MANY other things that gave me the distinct impression that you'd rather not have certain IP's "co-opted" by female-centric storylines.

Considering that none of these IPs A) belong to you, and B) cost you any money, either in producing or paying tickets for, I find extremely funny that you even care enough TO post an emoji. Is it because you LIKE giving the impression that you're a misogynist?

Bwahahahahahaha! A misogynist? That's a good one. I'm actually a pro-active feminist in that I find it highly insulting that the industry feels the need to re-make male-centric movies with female casts instead of making quality ORIGINAL female-cast movies. Just the same as I find it demeaning and a bit racist to take an existent movie and make it all-black, or all-this, or all-that. All it says to me is that the industry and studios are too chicken to take a chance and make something ORIGINAL, that they can only promote the many magnificent female stars through male remade retreads. Like, "This is all we think you can aspire to."

I find all THAT to be HIGHLY misogynist, on an industry-wide level. Sure, I understand that they're looking at it from a bottom-line perspective, but IMO the optics certainly aren't good.

I do get that a lot of women love them and revel in them, and that's cool. Not that I have a voice about what they have to say, but it's 100 percent their prerogative. If anyone wants to see this, or anything else under the sun, well, I'm not trying to stop them. All appearances say that I'm doing everything from killing someone's darling to peeing in their Cheerios, but that's just histrionic overreactions.

So, @carrrnuttt , you are about as off the mark as it is possible to be. Gave me a good laugh. You did manage to do something that Chappie didn't, and provoke a real response, so there's that.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Stout's been on record for years and years for hating remakes. As a writer himself he feels it is laziness. It's about the process. Change genders, slap a movie together, and voila. He wants more originality and less retreads.

Thank you. I specifically hate the "let's just re-do this as an all-X movie!", for reasons I just posted.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,123
Reaction score
60,430
Stout's been on record for years and years for hating remakes. As a writer himself he feels it is laziness. It's about the process. Change genders, slap a movie together, and voila. He wants more originality and less retreads.

This doesn’t hold water when he gets excited about never-Ending Spider-Man, James Bonds, Marvel movies... etc, etc.

He can argue those are existing material... sure, as comic. But the Ocean’s series is now a day different kind of IP. To get your panties in a bunch as the powers that be continue expanding it’s Universe doesnt make a lot of sense unless you’re calling for the end to all additional comic characters at this point.
 

carrrnuttt

Didactic
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
9,292
Reaction score
8,865
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Stout's been on record for years and years for hating remakes. As a writer himself he feels it is laziness. It's about the process. Change genders, slap a movie together, and voila. He wants more originality and less retreads.

I didn't say what he IS. I stated what the impression he gives to me is.

Bwahahahahahaha! A misogynist? That's a good one. I'm actually a pro-active feminist in that I find it highly insulting that the industry feels the need to re-make male-centric movies with female casts instead of making quality ORIGINAL female-cast movies. Just the same as I find it demeaning and a bit racist to take an existent movie and make it all-black, or all-this, or all-that. All it says to me is that the industry and studios are too chicken to take a chance and make something ORIGINAL, that they can only promote the many magnificent female stars through male remade retreads. Like, "This is all we think you can aspire to."

I find all THAT to be HIGHLY misogynist, on an industry-wide level. Sure, I understand that they're looking at it from a bottom-line perspective, but IMO the optics certainly aren't good.

I do get that a lot of women love them and revel in them, and that's cool. Not that I have a voice about what they have to say, but it's 100 percent their prerogative. If anyone wants to see this, or anything else under the sun, well, I'm not trying to stop them. All appearances say that I'm doing everything from killing someone's darling to peeing in their Cheerios, but that's just histrionic overreactions.

So, @carrrnuttt , you are about as off the mark as it is possible to be. Gave me a good laugh. You did manage to do something that Chappie didn't, and provoke a real response, so there's that.

Huh?

I didn't realize they just re-printed the scripts from the previous movies and slapped women in?

Damn. The original writers and directors need to be credited. This is a travesty.

Also, Ford seems to keep reusing the F-150 name. So unoriginal.
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
This doesn’t hold water when he gets excited about never-Ending Spider-Man, James Bonds, Marvel movies... etc, etc.

He can argue those are existing material... sure, as comic. But the Ocean’s series is now a day different kind of IP. To get your panties in a bunch as the powers that be continue expanding it’s Universe doesnt make a lot of sense unless you’re calling for the end to all additional comic characters at this point.

This modern Oceans series is spun off of a remake anyway, Like I said, I'll give it a chance and hope it isn't just a cash grab. I don't mind it as much since it sounds like a continuation (even though it is out of sequence by its title ;) ). I'd have to go back and watch, but did Danny's character ever discuss his sister/family much in the previous three films?

The Ghostbusters film (which I still have no desire to see) didn't even know what it was supposed to be. Reports came out that it was a remake, then a re-imagining, then a sequel, then...blah blah blah. Kind of lost its identity along the way, I guess.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I didn't say what he IS. I stated what the impression he gives to me is.



Huh?

I didn't realize they just re-printed the scripts from the previous movies and slapped women in?

Damn. The original writers and directors need to be credited. This is a travesty.

Also, Ford seems to keep reusing the F-150 name. So unoriginal.

Nice (lame) side-stepping there. Notice you withdrew all the way from misguided claims of misogyny to truck references. Yeah, that's relevant.
 

carrrnuttt

Didactic
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
9,292
Reaction score
8,865
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Nice (lame) side-stepping there. Notice you withdrew all the way from misguided claims of misogyny to truck references. Yeah, that's relevant.

Feel free to point me to where I claimed you're a misogynist. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
This doesn’t hold water when he gets excited about never-Ending Spider-Man, James Bonds, Marvel movies... etc, etc.

He can argue those are existing material... sure, as comic. But the Ocean’s series is now a day different kind of IP. To get your panties in a bunch as the powers that be continue expanding it’s Universe doesnt make a lot of sense unless you’re calling for the end to all additional comic characters at this point.

And you're caring so much about my opinion why again? I mean, I guess it's nice that I'm so relevant, but... :)

You're trying to spin an Ocean's universe? Seriously? I mean, that right there is a whole planet in the ridiculous universe.

I certainly don't get excited about never-ending Spider-Man movies, because until this recent one, I refused to watch them for...I don't even know how many they made. Liked the original, and the new one, but boy, did the TM stuff fall off a cliff in quality.

As for James Bond, that is just a whole other can of worms. It existed before I was born, and continued through my childhood into adulthood. Hated the last one, loved Skyfall, and dig the books. I'm lukewarm about any more, at this point.

But yes, Cheese, you do have a point in that I sometimes like re-makes and sometimes don't. I'm on record as saying I'm a happy hypocrite there. It all depends on the project for me. For instance, I like the re-made Oceans 11 better than the original (though I liked the original's ending more). Anyone that claims to like Carpenter's Thing (one of the best horror movies ever made) and says all remakes are garbage are true hypocrites.

The difference, for me? The eye test, so to speak. Marvel has been cranking out mostly quality movies, and have another hero movie (Black Panther)? Cool, I'll probably see it. Hey, we made one (maybe two?) awful sequels to Oceans 11, which is already a remake, and NOW we're going to make an Oceans movie...with women! Dear Lord, don't expect me to get excited about that!
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
88,123
Reaction score
60,430
This modern Oceans series is spun off of a remake anyway, Like I said, I'll give it a chance and hope it isn't just a cash grab. I don't mind it as much since it sounds like a continuation (even though it is out of sequence by its title ;) ). I'd have to go back and watch, but did Danny's character ever discuss his sister/family much in the previous three films?

The Ghostbusters film (which I still have no desire to see) didn't even know what it was supposed to be. Reports came out that it was a remake, then a re-imagining, then a sequel, then...blah blah blah. Kind of lost its identity along the way, I guess.

The Ghostbusters film I was just pissed about in principle. I'd be just just as pissed if they remade Back To The Future. Some movies are just too sacred to me.

And I even gave Ghostbusters a chance. All the women in it are funny on their own, I like Paul Feig as a director, but man, that movie just fell completely flat on the screen.

I think Stout's reaction here is odd because he doesn't even know if this is a remake. It just looks like an all-star female heist movie with marketing hoping to goose it with a familiar title.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Is it because you LIKE giving the impression that you're a misogynist?

I know, I know. "But, but I didn't explicitly SAY you're a misogynist." Purposeful wiggle room written in while at the same time stepping up to insult me. Yeah, pony up and take ownership of what you throw around, why don't you.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
The Ghostbusters film I was just pissed about in principle. I'd be just just as pissed if they remade Back To The Future. Some movies are just too sacred to me.

And I even gave Ghostbusters a chance. All the women in it are funny on their own, I like Paul Feig as a director, but man, that movie just fell completely flat on the screen.

I think Stout's reaction here is odd because he doesn't even know if this is a remake. It just looks like an all-star female heist movie with marketing hoping to goose it with a familiar title.

I'd be all for this, if it looked good. Minus the "ooh, look, it's OCEANS!!!" Yeah, they're going to get some mileage out of the name, but they're also going to get eye rolls and plenty of people like me that don't like it. Everyone I know thinks it's a stupid idea.
 

carrrnuttt

Didactic
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Posts
9,292
Reaction score
8,865
Location
Phoenix, AZ
I know, I know. "But, but I didn't explicitly SAY you're a misogynist." Purposeful wiggle room written in while at the same time stepping up to insult me. Yeah, pony up and take ownership of what you throw around, why don't you.

That's because I don't like telling people what they are when I don't know them.

I can only tell you what YOUR WORDS made me think of you.
 
OP
OP
oaken1

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
16,231
Reaction score
12,467
Location
Modesto, California
hot damn...didnt realize I posted this in the P&R forums... but here it is...veiled charges of racism and open charges of miso...misi...myso...woman hating!

it both shocks and amuses/disgusts me that so many people these days feel the need to see an "ism" issue whenever someone else does not like something.

I was raised by a woman who dealt with heters every day at work...got accused of screwing her way to the top, being a suck up... but every day she did her job as the first female to ever do that job...over and over and over... now her old company is full of women. She taught me that if anybody needs to ride on someone elses coat tails to gain success then they do not deserve the success they get...

cracked me up the other day...what with all these accusations of sexual assault and harrassment... she kept asking, "well where are the women?"... then a few days back,...there it was...finally a female made the ranks of the accused...and dear old mom got so excited, laughed and had a big ol grin for an hour...
equality is not just about being loved equally but also about being hated equally....

personally...Black Captain america...black spidey,...female ocean... its all crap. If people do not always want to be compared to old white guys, then get off the old white guy coat tails...

Black Panther did that...

there is no credibility to be gained just changing white male characters to females or minorities...it screams, we cant stand on our own but we want to take away credit white males have earned...
T'Challa was always badass...and even back in the seventies I didnt know anybody who thought less of him because he was african...he was just a badass, all on his own.

Its amazing really....this discussion still gets people worked up and Black Panther is over 50 years old.... Hollywood, since they are so fond of borrowing...should borrow stan lee's formula and start from scratch
 

Dback Jon

Killer Snail
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
75,873
Reaction score
32,625
Location
Scottsdale
This modern Oceans series is spun off of a remake anyway, Like I said, I'll give it a chance and hope it isn't just a cash grab. I don't mind it as much since it sounds like a continuation (even though it is out of sequence by its title ;) ). I'd have to go back and watch, but did Danny's character ever discuss his sister/family much in the previous three films?

The Ghostbusters film (which I still have no desire to see) didn't even know what it was supposed to be. Reports came out that it was a remake, then a re-imagining, then a sequel, then...blah blah blah. Kind of lost its identity along the way, I guess.

How do you know the Ghostbusters film lost its identity if you have never seen it? I thought it was a fun film.
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,447
Reaction score
20,928
Location
The Dark Side
How do you know the Ghostbusters film lost its identity if you have never seen it? I thought it was a fun film.

The people responsible for making the film couldn't even keep it straight what kind of film they were making. That's all.

Here is how many articles dealt with the movie as it was in production and even post-production: "upcoming Ghostbusters reboot/remake/reimagining."

This article nails down why longtime fans of the original disliked the idea of anything less than a continuation of the story. Even if a remake was accepted, it is unacceptable to have any original cast members as completely different characters from their original roles (as if they never existed). Meh. That's just ridiculous.

Geeks vs. Ghostbusters: The Most Controversial Remake of the Year

https://vergecampus.com/2016/05/ghostbusters-controversial-remake-2016/
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
See BIM's post.



It wasn't worth discussing in the first place. You got your panties in a bunch because I posted a single emoji in response to a posted movie. I could rant and be an ass about how you're soooooo wrong for not loving Guardians of the Galaxy as much as I do, but that would be stupid, childish, and would serve no purpose. Or as much purpose as all this has served.
Nothing to do with an emoji. Lol
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
Bwahahahahahaha! A misogynist? That's a good one. I'm actually a pro-active feminist in that I find it highly insulting that the industry feels the need to re-make male-centric movies with female casts instead of making quality ORIGINAL female-cast movies. Just the same as I find it demeaning and a bit racist to take an existent movie and make it all-black, or all-this, or all-that. All it says to me is that the industry and studios are too chicken to take a chance and make something ORIGINAL, that they can only promote the many magnificent female stars through male remade retreads. Like, "This is all we think you can aspire to."

I find all THAT to be HIGHLY misogynist, on an industry-wide level. Sure, I understand that they're looking at it from a bottom-line perspective, but IMO the optics certainly aren't good.

I do get that a lot of women love them and revel in them, and that's cool. Not that I have a voice about what they have to say, but it's 100 percent their prerogative. If anyone wants to see this, or anything else under the sun, well, I'm not trying to stop them. All appearances say that I'm doing everything from killing someone's darling to peeing in their Cheerios, but that's just histrionic overreactions.

So, @carrrnuttt , you are about as off the mark as it is possible to be. Gave me a good laugh. You did manage to do something that Chappie didn't, and provoke a real response, so there's that.
Don’t be a jerk. I had NO thoughts that it was because you are anti-female so take your self righteousness and go.

But hey feel free to reduce yourself to a name calling bully who posts emojis.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
44,681
Reaction score
14,141
Location
Round Rock, TX
The people responsible for making the film couldn't even keep it straight what kind of film they were making. That's all.

Here is how many articles dealt with the movie as it was in production and even post-production: "upcoming Ghostbusters reboot/remake/reimagining."

This article nails down why longtime fans of the original disliked the idea of anything less than a continuation of the story. Even if a remake was accepted, it is unacceptable to have any original cast members as completely different characters from their original roles (as if they never existed). Meh. That's just ridiculous.

Geeks vs. Ghostbusters: The Most Controversial Remake of the Year

https://vergecampus.com/2016/05/ghostbusters-controversial-remake-2016/
Losing credibility.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
534,851
Posts
5,246,885
Members
6,274
Latest member
G-PA
Top