Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ah the good ol' "Lol JK" walkback.

Anyways, maybe Reitman's movie will be okay.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Ah the good ol' "Lol JK" walkback.

Anyways, maybe Reitman's movie will be okay.

Hey man, its not my fault you dont know what these terms mean, thats your hang up not mine, perhaps if you were less reactionary and emotional you would not have jumped the gun and gone straight for the stereotypical "well YOUR a toxic person" defence, As far as I am concerned we have all been having quite a nice even conversation until you did that, how about going out for a smoke or having a nice cup of tea and ten min break from the keyboard eh?

Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

 Manchu wrote:
Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-sexist-anti-ghostbusters-crusade-goes-mainstream

So I mentioned that then candidate for President Donald J. Trump(Now President) made tweets and posts about the movie. But you seem to ignore it and want to call it extremely unpopular opinions.

That seems reasonable.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-sexist-anti-ghostbusters-crusade-goes-mainstream

So I mentioned that then candidate for President Donald J. Trump(Now President) made tweets and posts about the movie. But you seem to ignore it and want to call it extremely unpopular opinions.

That seems reasonable.

Sure. GB 2016 flopped because Trump twitted about it...

 Formosa wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Ah the good ol' "Lol JK" walkback.

Anyways, maybe Reitman's movie will be okay.

Hey man, its not my fault you dont know what these terms mean, thats your hang up not mine, perhaps if you were less reactionary and emotional you would not have jumped the gun and gone straight for the stereotypical "well YOUR a toxic person" defence, As far as I am concerned we have all been having quite a nice even conversation until you did that, how about going out for a smoke or having a nice cup of tea and ten min break from the keyboard eh?

So I make one series of comments and now I'm the "reactionary and emotional" one while you're continually posting about critics being activists and the media being the one driving all of the "rage"?

Yeah. I'm the one who needs to step away and "jumped the gun".

Manchu wrote:Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

You understand that this isn't like some weirdo on the street corner harping on about the end of the world, right? We're talking about things like youtubers who go out of their way to try to present their arguments as reasonable and measured when the underlying argument is "It's not MY Ghostbusters!".

A good example of this was the people who tried to express faux outrage at Leslie Jones that her character was "too urban" and lacked any real depth.

But what if your movie is a flop AND weirdos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

Yes yes yes, we get it--you think that Sony tried to pin all the blame on a poor film on the "weirdos".

topaxygouroun i wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-sexist-anti-ghostbusters-crusade-goes-mainstream

So I mentioned that then candidate for President Donald J. Trump(Now President) made tweets and posts about the movie. But you seem to ignore it and want to call it extremely unpopular opinions.

That seems reasonable.

Sure. GB 2016 flopped because Trump twitted about it...

Didn't you know? There are only three possible groups of moviegoers: Evil monstrous toxic misogynophobic manbabies, drooling morons who are brainwashed by the aforementioned, and Clever Big-brain Smart People Who Agree With Dreadwinter And Kan

If someone makes a reasonable argument that lots of people find compelling then we aren’t talking about a weirdo. That’s the point: people actually made compelling arguments criticizing these movies that reflected the opinions of millions of other people. That’s why GB2016 failed — because it was garbage. It didn’t fail because of misogyny.

 Kanluwen wrote:
And my point is literally made for me by Formosa.

Referring to people as "normies" and a whine about "activists" and "ragebait media"...you want an example of a toxic fan?

There ya go. Right. Fricking. There.

What kind of toxic behavior has he exhibited in the post to which you refer? Simply not agreeing with you?

It's absolutely clear to most people that there is an ideological motivation behind the way that these issues are reported. It is a narrative, and one with glaring inconsistencies and double standards that are more and more naked and obvious every day. Likewise, I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that clickbait, or "ragebait" as Formosa put it, is not a distinct business strategy that has been adopted by blog-type publications in order to capitalize off of controversy and generate page views. Clearly, as you demonstrate, there is a core audience that responds to these strategies, but it's not large enough to sustain the profitability of the publications that employ them long term. "Normies", or in other words, your average people who are not ideologically committed one way or another, are tuning out. The message is not for them, it's for a small minority of people who are engaged in these issues, because those are the people who are going to share links and make noise whether they agree with the stories or not. I've got a news flash for you; half of the audience for this narrative is the so-called toxic fans. They are a major part of the customer base being served here.

There really isn't anything controversial in any of the sentiment I've just shared. Clickbait is a business strategy, and there is a minority of ideologically committed people who respond vocally to controversy. What part of that do you object to?

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-sexist-anti-ghostbusters-crusade-goes-mainstream

So I mentioned that then candidate for President Donald J. Trump(Now President) made tweets and posts about the movie. But you seem to ignore it and want to call it extremely unpopular opinions.

That seems reasonable.

Haha i remember that, I do not doubt that had an effect, as I am sure you will agree the media activists also had an impact too, I am quite surprised that we are all not just agreeing that the entire debacle around the movie was mishandled, I still think that it should be S.O.Ps to tell your staff to stay silent and out of these issues, last thing anyone wants is the twitter mob coming down from on high to make your life hell, get you sacked, call for violence against you and your family, better to just stay out of it all together I think.

BTW I do not know how much you use daily beast but this is what my media checker says about it.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

So I make one series of comments and now I'm the "reactionary and emotional" one while you're continually posting about critics being activists and the media being the one driving all of the "rage"?

Yeah. I'm the one who needs to step away and "jumped the gun".

Well yeah Kan, I am talking about a specific set of journalists here, how else would you describe them? they even describe themselves as activists, and yes clickbait and "ragebait" are ... well i hesitate to call them legitimate, but they are working strategies used to generate revenue, these people have latched onto a working method of getting that cash and will continue to do it.
Its a very simple formula

Find whats popular, Ghostbusters in this case

Make a title with a loaded term

Write an article claiming some kind of minority, ideal or some other "triggering" term, is being marginalised, or the opposite.

People see these loaded terms and click the article, usually a few hundred words at most with Adds everywhere, pure opinion with no citations claiming something outlandish or taking quotes out of context.

Person shares out of anger or shock at how good/bad the loaded subject is.

Rinse and repeat

Now if a lot of people follow this formula it creates a false controversy (a non-troversy), and if it goes viral then it compounds the issue as the message is now everywhere and the Muggles see it, they then get a false impression because of this fake controversy that X is Y, its a bloody facinating thing to follow and watch in real time

I just wish the studios had taken a more subdued, tactful route. It's okay to say a movie just isn't for some people. Not everyone needs to be onboard. But lashing out or even making negative comments about a tiny minority of fans is uncouth and almost always comes back to haunt them. Fan bases seem to circle the wagons at any perceived criticism from the outside. It's like saying you were only talking about the deplorables, not realizing how many people will decide you must have been talking about them. Studios with marketing departments should never have fallen into this trap.

Yeah, but maybe executives and directors never heard that thing low-level managment drums into low-level employees: the customer is always right.

 Formosa wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Well who cares if some one with extremely unpopular opinions calls for a boycott? Who’s going to listen to a weirdo?

But what if your movie is a flop AND weidos are calling for boycotts? Then you can blame the weirdo.

And morons will believe you.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-sexist-anti-ghostbusters-crusade-goes-mainstream

So I mentioned that then candidate for President Donald J. Trump(Now President) made tweets and posts about the movie. But you seem to ignore it and want to call it extremely unpopular opinions.

That seems reasonable.

Haha i remember that, I do not doubt that had an effect, as I am sure you will agree the media activists also had an impact too, I am quite surprised that we are all not just agreeing that the entire debacle around the movie was mishandled, I still think that it should be S.O.Ps to tell your staff to stay silent and out of these issues, last thing anyone wants is the twitter mob coming down from on high to make your life hell, get you sacked, call for violence against you and your family, better to just stay out of it all together I think.

BTW I do not know how much you use daily beast but this is what my media checker says about it.

Spoiler:

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward liberal causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage liberal causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

I know nothing of Daily Beast nor do I care to. It was a vehicle to get the video up. To show that it wasn't just a small amount of trolls or non-influential people doing this, as Manchu keeps stating.

 Manchu wrote:
If someone makes a reasonable argument that lots of people find compelling then we aren’t talking about a weirdo. That’s the point: people actually made compelling arguments criticizing these movies that reflected the opinions of millions of other people. That’s why GB2016 failed — because it was garbage. It didn’t fail because of misogyny.

It failed just as much because of misogyny as feminism. Both sides overreacted over this movie and it ruined it for the people who just wanted a fun Ghostbusters movie. You cannot argue that it was the studios fault for pushing a "narrative" and then say the movie only failed because it sucked.

You have to pick an argument here.

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah, but maybe executives and directors never heard that thing low-level managment drums into low-level employees: the customer is always right.

I was just thinking that they must never have worked retail. Rookie mistake.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I just wish the studios had taken a more subdued, tactful route. It's okay to say a movie just isn't for some people. Not everyone needs to be onboard. But lashing out or even making negative comments about a tiny minority of fans is uncouth and almost always comes back to haunt them. Fan bases seem to circle the wagons at any perceived criticism from the outside. It's like saying you were only talking about the deplorables, not realizing how many people will decide you must have been talking about them. Studios with marketing departments should never have fallen into this trap.

I agree with you, but sadly, if you think that cultural and political discourse is pretty much ever going to be subtle or tactful again I've got bad news for you. It's going to get much, much worse from here on out, and it's going to seep into everything including marketing and public relations for products and companies that seemingly have nothing to do with it and nothing to gain other than quick bursts of viral notoriety.

You cannot argue that it was the studios fault for pushing a "narrative" and then say the movie only failed because it sucked.

I’ve consistently attributed the movie’s failure to its poor quality. The narrative pushed by Sony was an attempt to shift the conversation from how poor the quality was to something about ideology — better that the buzz around the movie was about fighting evil bigotry than it, ya know, the film being bad.

not trying to catch you out or anything dreadwinter, was just asking if you knew about the daily beast, they are basically exactly the kind of "journalists" that i have been talking about.

Anyway, curious to know what direction you lot would like to see this movie take, I have already said that I want dark and gritty like the first movie but with a bit of comedy thrown in, what would you all like to see?

I’m especially curious, as that was the point of the fething thread in the first place.

 Formosa wrote:
not trying to catch you out or anything dreadwinter, was just asking if you knew about the daily beast, they are basically exactly the kind of "journalists" that i have been talking about.

Anyway, curious to know what direction you lot would like to see this movie take, I have already said that I want dark and gritty like the first movie but with a bit of comedy thrown in, what would you all like to see?

The best I feel like I can realistically expect is a "handing off the torch" story that's basically a retread of the original movie with a fresh face, a la The Force Awakens. If they keep a good balance between horror and comedy that would be a plus.

I still haven't seen the 2016 reboot, if only because I never thought of GB1 as being that good and I hardly wanted to wade into the giant "my feels are bigger than yours" value flag waving contest around it for a franchise I couldn't care less or more about. Honestly I probably won't even see this one unless the trailers really catch my interest somehow.

Thinking about what direction would get me in the door, I have the sudden thought of this kind of movie is the perfect premise for another Simon Pegg/Nick Frost comedy. You know, the kind that fully realizes how utterly ludicrous the premise is and just runs tongue and cheek the whole way to the finish line.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m especially curious, as that was the point of the fething thread in the first place.

haha fair one


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luciferian wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
not trying to catch you out or anything dreadwinter, was just asking if you knew about the daily beast, they are basically exactly the kind of "journalists" that i have been talking about.

Anyway, curious to know what direction you lot would like to see this movie take, I have already said that I want dark and gritty like the first movie but with a bit of comedy thrown in, what would you all like to see?

The best I feel like I can realistically expect is a "handing off the torch" story that's basically a retread of the original movie with a fresh face, a la The Force Awakens. If they keep a good balance between horror and comedy that would be a plus.

yeah your most likely right, if done well it could be a really good story, cant remember the last "passing of the torch" story that was good though

actually sod that, i cant even remember a passing of the torch story in recent memory ???

I am hoping for deadpan humor set against effects that are spooky rather than IN UR FACE, at least until the third act.

 Formosa wrote:

yeah your most likely right, if done well it could be a really good story, cant remember the last "passing of the torch" story that was good though

actually sod that, i cant even remember a passing of the torch story in recent memory ???

Well there's The Force Awakens. Creed arguably did a good job of passing the torch.

 Luciferian wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

yeah your most likely right, if done well it could be a really good story, cant remember the last "passing of the torch" story that was good though

actually sod that, i cant even remember a passing of the torch story in recent memory ???

Well there's The Force Awakens. Creed arguably did a good job of passing the torch.

Force awaken.... ok I will grudgingly give you that, its a crap film I still like for some reason


Creed, well yeah, hands down, cant believe i forgot about that, if GB 2020 hits that emotional tempo (fat chance) i will be great.

 Formosa wrote:

Force awaken.... ok I will grudgingly give you that, its a crap film I still like for some reason


Creed, well yeah, hands down, cant believe i forgot about that, if GB 2020 hits that emotional tempo (fat chance) i will be great.

The Rocky franchise is probably not something that crosses a lot of people's minds when we're talking about reboots and sequels, but if you're a Rocky fan it's a pretty good example of how they can be done well. They stay true to what fans enjoyed about the original film in the first place, which people obviously appreciate enough for the same basic story to be told in eight movies with quite a decent measure of commercial success.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Yeah, but maybe executives and directors never heard that thing low-level managment drums into low-level employees: the customer is always right.

I was just thinking that they must never have worked retail. Rookie mistake.

I've worked retail. The 'customer is always right' isn't true or even a useful attitude. The customer either pays money and leaves, or is an annoying pillock; management just insists that staff be two-faced about it and humor them (in public).

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m especially curious, as that was the point of the fething thread in the first place.

My understanding is that it exists for Dreadwinter to be blazingly wrong. Again.

But yeah, point taken that this has gone gloriously off the rails and into the wild

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
I’m especially curious, as that was the point of the fething thread in the first place.

My understanding is that it exists for Dreadwinter to be blazingly wrong. Again.

But yeah, point taken that this has gone gloriously off the rails and into the wild

I am still waiting for you or anyone else to prove otherwise.

Voss wrote:

I've worked retail. The 'customer is always right' isn't true or even a useful attitude. The customer either pays money and leaves, or is an annoying pillock; management just insists that staff be two-faced about it and humor them (in public).

Voss, I have to agree with you there. Add to that "the customer always reserves the right to be abusive." which isn't said but heavily implied...

Which reminds me, the abuse that the cast and crew of Last Jedi had received was absolutely disgusting. I nearly walked out of ROTJ:SE and The Force Awakens, but there was no way in hell I would have sunk that low about it. Don't get me wrong, I understand others felt Last Jedi was disappointing and totally support their right to voice their opinion, but that was taking the biscuit.

SamusDrake wrote:

Voss wrote:

I've worked retail. The 'customer is always right' isn't true or even a useful attitude. The customer either pays money and leaves, or is an annoying pillock; management just insists that staff be two-faced about it and humor them (in public).

Voss, I have to agree with you there. Add to that "the customer always reserves the right to be abusive." which isn't said but heavily implied...

Which reminds me, the abuse that the cast and crew of Last Jedi had received was absolutely disgusting. I nearly walked out of ROTJ:SE and The Force Awakens, but there was no way in hell I would have sunk that low about it. Don't get me wrong, I understand others felt Last Jedi was disappointing and totally support their right to voice their opinion, but that was taking the biscuit.

Twitter mate, if you took the worst of both wings and threw them into a locked room, you still would not get anything near the insanity that is twitter.