[ SECRET POST #6079 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6079 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.
[Story of Seasons]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.


























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 26 secrets from Secret Submission Post #869.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Nope, sorry OP.
Gotta disagree, hard on this one.
Mr Plinkett on yt (the reviewer who did the big takedown on the Star Wars prequels) hit the nail on the head as to why I found it mildly entertaining but the more I thought about it, the remake left a bad taste in my mouth.
Firstly (as he points out) it has nothing to do with the gender swap. In fact, it probably would have worked better if Kristen Wiig had written the movie!
The original was "lightning in a bottle". All the elements came together. It was genuinely creepy to me (the ghost in the library creeps me to this day) whereas the remake isn't creepy in the least.
The original had some adlibs but also had a tight script. The remake had constant adlibs (are we really going to argue that vagina fart jokes are funny? Or jokes about not getting an extra dumpling? Though I'll admit Chris Hemsworth had his moments).
The original's main plot was around starting a new small business. The point was that the characters were average slobs, that added to the humour. To me, the plot of the remake got away from me.
Also, all the talk about the sleasiness of the original. (To be fair, I found the remake more gross with all the talk about slime "In every crack" and unfunny vagina fart jokes). Apart from Venkman, the others didn't even interact with women and when they did were respectful.
As for Venkman, sure he was a sleeze, absolutely, but Sigourney Weaver was amused by him, not threatened. Note that when Sigourney Weaver's character did come onto him, he refused to sleep with her as she was possessed and he recognised it to be wrong (considering that even in recent tv shows *Supernatural* main characters thought nothing of sleeping with-raping- a possessed person who can't give consent, that's pretty big for the 80s).
Also with this one, Chris Hemsworth's character was sexualised constantly and on top of that completely stupid. Sigourney Weaver in the original was smart, witty and accomplished, who kept up with Venkman's wit.
Sorry for the rant but I truly love the original and take umbrage with a lot of the potshots taken at it. If people like the remake, sure fine. But there's no need to take down the original.

[(Anonymous)]

Agreed. There was a certain atmosphere to the OG. The entire feel of the roof top extra dimensional portal temple, and the Ivo Shandor history. A lot of the scenes and the humor.

Yeah, we can really do without the vagina farts. And the usual bitter comments about nostalgia glasses/goggles.

[(Anonymous)]

"In fact, it probably would have worked better if Kristen Wiig had written the movie!"

Honestly, co-signed on that one. I think that could have made it genuinely funny instead of what it was, because it had an A+ cast.

[(Anonymous)]

+1000

I love the original unapologetically. It was a huge deal at the time and of course I have nostalgia for it but also it’s a genuinely enjoyable movie. I personally didn’t like the remake and the grossout humor had a lot to do with it. I didn’t know any of the cast when I watched it except Chris Hemsworth but by the end I had grown to really dislike some of them. I can still enjoy the original though and fans of the remake can enjoy that. I just don’t understand why it’s rare any of those fans ever mention anything about the movie and instead just criticize the original as if it was a modern movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, the grossout humor was my main problem with it because I just find that kind of thing juvenile, not funny. It's not funny in films starring men and it's not funny in films starring women, either.

[(Anonymous)]

Venkman only didn't sleep her her because he had legit feelings for her and the fact she was possessed by a supernatural dog probably helped deter him, because up until her it was all about getting into the pants of ladies and scamming people out of money.

Sorry you like creepy sex perverts.

[(Anonymous)]

As opposed to the creepy badminton perverts? Good to see you’re bringing your middle school A-game to this.

[(Anonymous)]

Stop attacking real life people over fictional characters. I really don't care what you take issue with about the character itself.

[(Anonymous)]

+10000

Afterlife at least gave us some "woman power" without the constants ablibs and taking down the original.

[(Anonymous)]

thank you. i had all the same issues with the movie (and to be honest criticisms with the original, i don't think the original's perfect by any means and i get why people wouldn't vibe with it in general but feig's humor feels very...i don't know. i don't tend to dislike his stuff most of the time but i hated it here).