Ghostbuster (2017)

The Producers.
Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder could have done this film oh-so-much better?

Jason Reitman, son of Ivan Reitman the original director of Ghostbusters is planning a Ghostbuster 3 movie for 2020.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46889992

It will be a continuation of the original series with Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd and will pretend the 2017 movie did not happen.

Leslie Jones, one of the stars of the 2017 movie, is upset about the new movie, saying "Leslie Jones Slams New Ghostbusters Sequel in Original Universe: It's Like We Didn't 'Count'" Here's the thing, the movie they were in did the exactly that and pretended like the two originals didn't exist, so what's the difference?

I take it you didn't read what exactly she was saying?

Jones has gone on such a full-bore, expletive-laden screech fest she may well have just tanked her own career outside of projects involving her pals.

Rather than admit that the movie she was in failed and that this is a Hail Mary to keep the franchise going, she's straight-up accusing people of racism and sexism... and that's the stuff I can even hint at on a family website.

mrfatso that was my point exactly

There's a saying that's been circulating on the internet for some time now:

"Get woke, go broke".

The idea behind the sentiment is that the more "progressive" a creative project is, the more likely it is to tank when put in front of mainstream audiences.

The 2016 "Ghostbusters" movie is often hailed as a prime example of this. The film was created to be as "progressive" as possible, and so when complaints started rolling in there was a concerted effort to portray any and all complaints as being racist and bigoted in nature when perhaps 9% of them were based on one study I saw. This created a vicious circle in which more people started criticizing the film and the people around it, leading to even louder screeching about "You're all bigots!". Feig spent so much money on the film despite it not being able to open in China that the film *needed* every single viewer it could muster, but the whole faux controversy turned it into a must-miss. Thus, it flopped.

Rather than own up to the fact that the floppage was due entirely to controllable factors, as we can see there are still efforts being made to pretend that it was all about bigotry. It's no wonder, then, that Sony is so desperate to pave over the entire mess that this picture has become and pretend it never happened.

The minute the first trailer started getting negative feedback, Feig, Jones, and several others associated with both the film itself and Sony corporate took to social media to begin spinning lengthy narratives about how 100% of the criticisms were bigoted in nature, while Sony began to hide or delete negative YouTube comments that weren't bigoted to try and further the narrative.

This mindset and attitude has been going on for a while, Ghostbusters 2016 was just the one where it was first made apparent;

Star Trek Discovery; Negative reactions to the series have brought reactions of 'sexist white male!' and 'vocal minority*'. I've been on the receiving end of this for having the nerve to point out that the viewer figures for the show being thrown around, 9.6 million, were for the pilot episode on CBS and not for the episodes on CBS AA**. And in fact that 9.6 million figure was over three times the maximum number of subscribers CBS AA had.
What I didn't mention was anything about the cast, the writing or the reactions to the series. But apparently numbers are sexist and racist nowadays....

(*The term 'vocal minority' is an excuse I first ran into over the ending of Mass Effect 3. Even though every poll conducted indicated that the percentage of people who had serious issues with the ending was in the 80% range. Apparently in new maths that is a minority.)

(**If you go back and read my comments about Discovery in the Star Trek thread elsewhere you may notice that even before the series was released I made some of the following predictions; 1; The series was going to be a disaster, or at least no bring in anything close to the number of viewers/subscribers to CBS AA as they hoped/wanted. 2; They would green light a second season rather than admit it was a disaster. 3; They would make claims about the shows success that while technically true would be misleading. This would include giving percentage increases without any base figures, saying it was the most successful AA show without stating what was the previous most successful series or how many viewers that may have had and last of all heavily touting the ratings for the pilot (which they couldn't hide) without releasing any actual viewer figures for episodes on AA.
Note; Current estimates as to AA's Subscriber numbers are around 2.8 million and some inside sources are saying that STD's viewership is 100,000 or less per episode....)

Star Wars; Negative reactions to The Last Jedi resulted in being called 'Man-Babies' and having come from a 'toxic fanbase' that were 'sexist white men who were intimidated by strong women'.
This ignores that these same 'sexist white men' had no problems going to see The Force Awakens, a film that was heavily marketed with a female and 'person of colour' as the new lead characters, supported and liked Rogue One which has one of the most 'diverse' cast you could imagine and a female lead and avoided Solo, a film with a white male lead, entirely.
We also see outright lies being used to try and support this narrative - specifically that both Daisy Ridley and Kelly Marie Tran being forced off social media due to harassment from these 'toxic fans'. Both actresses have given their reasons for leaving social media and neither of them gave that as a reason or even mentioned being harassed. In Kelly Marie's case her reason was that she felt that it was making her unhappy because big companies and the media were pushing the idea that she could only be happy by buying their products, which is the exact opposite of the narrative that was being pushed. In Daisy's case she left before Last Jedi was even released, feeling that social media was basically an empty waste of time.
We also see the hypocrisy at work; Ryan 'Sad Troll' Johnson was screaming about how they should have black female directors on SW...then happily boasts about how he just got a film trilogy of his own*. Kennedy walked into Industrial Light and Magic and loudly pronounced that there were 'too many white men in here'. Then Lucasfilm loudly and proudly announces that they have employed a black woman as something like the third assistant producer. (A position that means nothing, it could just mean 'is the one who orders the coffee').
You might note that all of the directors Lucasfilm has employed on their films have been...white men. You might also notice that they are defining individuals worth by their colour and gender, which is the very definition of being sexist and racist.

(*Said Trilogy has since been moved to the Disney Streaming service, at least officially. If one were so minded one might think this would be a genius way to keep said project in development hell until they can quietly cancel it after they get rid of Kennedy and Johnson)

Doctor Who (Season 11/13th Doctor); Negative reactions are put down to *sigh* 'Toxic fans' who are *another sigh* 'Sexist men'.
Neither the pattern of the viewer figures or what the majority of fans are saying support this. The top three complaints are; Its dull, its badly written and has a forced political agenda. Number four is usually about Jodie Whittaker, and seems to be more or less equally split between 'she's a bad actress', 'She was miscast' or 'she hasn't been given much to work with to make her mark' (which of course comes back to the writing).
Of those who were not in favor of a female Doctor roughly 40% were, errm, women.
The argument about this Who 'no longer being accessible to only half the audience*' fall's flat when you look at the actual demographics which show that the male to female ratio is almost 50/50**

(*This comment was made by Jodie Whittaker herself, although I may be misquoting slightly. To be fair I wouldn't expect Jodie to actually know the shows actual demographics, so she is either stating what she THINKS is the demographics are repeating what she was told. If it is the latter such information would be coming from the Production offices, who would have to be spectacularly inept not to know who was actually watching their show)

(**Around 1.8% didn't give their gender, I'd assume that most of these would be women because for various reasons they are much more likely to be wary of giving such information online. So it is actually quite possible that more women are/were in the audience than men)

and what I've seen on my end was people on rants because he movie was (choose your epithet for progressive), and people with comments about the details of the movie; both positive and negative.

for example, my complaint about the movie version of Ender's game was flawed because in the book he didn't know about the war until late in the story.