General Arcade and Retro Chat - Insert Coin -

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I have a, must be 10 year old 42" plasma in the living room, 1080p and with a contrast ratio to die for, back when the only other option was an LCD panel and they were terrible.
Modern responsive led lighting as transformed contrast ratios completely.

Same here. A dinosaur of a 43" Pioneer plasma. Cracking picture, but starting to feel like a relic these days. 1080i/720p only too...so it's donkeys years old.

Steve X2

Does anyone know if the NeoGeo AES psu will work on the NeoGeo CD?

Edit:
Never mind, seems the aren't compatible

Myrddin wrote: »

Netlix 4K & Netflix HDR seem a bit of a waste to me...much like their 1080p content, you're still getting a compressed stream which isn't true to source. The loss isn't a problem on a 1080p panel, but at 4k resolutions, you want the source to have the highest bitrate possible. Same as HD television content, it's not even 1080p still, and is pretty poor when compared side by side with an uncompressed source like a blu ray.

You'd be suprised how well it can look even though its compressed.

Even youtube 4K demo videos look much sharper and more impressive than 1080p blurays.

I know what your saying though, but sometimes you need to switch of the analytical side of your brain and just let your eyes be the judge.

A bit like comparing 320kbps mp3s to wav, 24 bit audio to 16 bit, 96khz to 44.1khz, nobody can really tell the differnce.

The only time Netflix 4K was a problem was in a specific dark screen in Narcos shot in the jungle, the dark shadows looked very blueish instead of black which I reckon was the compression.

Everything else was great though.

So whos going to watch the new Feministbusters movie next week? :pac:

Before someone gives out to me for calling that, reserve judgement til you've seen the end of the film, you couldn't ask for bigger punch in the dick!

smurf492

Doge wrote:

So whos going to watch the new Feministbusters movie next week?

Me for one Doge...to me ghostbusters and the second are parts of my growing up. Think id be more pis#ed if it was a straight remake, i know it looks like a lot of the movie is the same but trailers these days suck so will watch and hopefully enjoy..

The nerd rage over Ghostbusters remains one of the most miserable internet trends I've come across. I don't even think it's going to be a particularly good film, but the sheer hyperbole being directed its way sight unseen is equally hilarious and depressing.

And so what if it's feminist? Feminist cinema has a rich and wonderful history, having given us some of the greatest directors who have ever lived. Frankly, the reaction to Ghostbusters shows feminism is as necessary as it has ever been, even if it's a shame some tumblr-level foundation feminism seems to be all some people think the ideology is.

OwaynOTT

Doge wrote: »

So whos going to watch the new Feministbusters movie next week? :pac:

Before someone gives out to me for calling that, reserve judgement til you've seen the end of the film, you couldn't ask for bigger punch in the dick!

So there shooting feminists with their proton packs and trapping them in containment fields?
Can see that being very popular with some :pac:

I've largely avoided the ****storm around the new Ghostbusters film. From what I've seen in the trailers, it does look bad...but as mentioned, trailers generally are bad these days anyway. If the comedy is good in it, so be it...it didn't need a sequel, but that can be forgiven it they do a good job of it. If the comedy is bad though, and the trailer indicates that, then I can understand the genuine uproar about it. Ghostbusters is close to many, many hearts, and is brimming with nostalgic charm for those who grew up watching it as kids.

Those hating on it for sexist reasons, need to cop on. I seen James Rolfe was targetted by the perpetually offended, for his video on it. Apparently he's a misogynist these days because he won't be going to see his favorite childhood movie being turned into mush :rolleyes:

Myrddin wrote: »

Those hating on it for sexist reasons, need to cop on. I seen James Rolfe was targetted by the perpetually offended, for his video on it. Apparently he's a misogynist these days because he won't be going to see his favorite childhood movie being turned into mush :rolleyes:

I think that video deserves to be targeted because, well, it's a sad indicator of where current cultural criticism is at. The film itself doesn't matter for Rolfe (who, I must confess, I find increasingly intolerable) to give his opinion on how 'awful' it is, which as someone with a deep passion for film criticism is an absolutely appalling stance for anyone to take, especially somebody with a wide audience. Sure, don't go to see the film if you don't want (hundreds of films I ignore every year), but to rant online about it and expect to be taken seriously... good luck to you. It also ignores the fact that Ghostbusters 'franchise' has already been taken advantage of time and time again - with a subpar sequel and plenty of cartoon / video game spin-offs. Anybody who thinks Ghostbusters 3 would have been anything other than a redundant cash-in is, frankly, deluding themselves

Mostly, it represents the obsessive nature of modern fandom, where many people have formed far too close relationships with Hollywood blockbusters. This is Ghostbusters we're talking about - it was always a silly, disposable studio comedy, no matter how much affection one had for it as a child. This whole 'they're ruining my childhood' attitude needs to go away and die in a fire - your childhood is safe, time to be an adult about these things.

As I said, I reckon the new Ghostbusters will be somewhere between 'fine' and 'pretty good', based on Feig's previous work etc... It will still be an inherently cynical studio comedy. But the culture war it has started before anybody has even seen the damn thing is indicative of the silly nerd rage that has permeated online discussion, and the ludicrous obsessions people with have with million-dollar Hollywood franchises that were never meant to be taken seriously in the first place.

As Devon Faraci noted:

One last note to the "Angry Video Game Nerd" and his friends: the original Ghostbusters was very important to you as a young man. Why can't you be big enough to let the new Ghostbusters be very important to a new generation of young women? Nobody's taking your Venkman away, they're just giving the other half of the population something they can look at and see a reflection of themselves. Wasn't that part of what was cool about watching Ghostbusters when you were young, that you could project yourself into this working class fantasy? Isn't it great that someone else who looks different than you do and who has a different life experience than you do can now have that same fun? That's not taking anything away from you.

Retr0gamer

So am I allowed hate the trailers because the comedy was terrible and it just looks awful without being an anti-feminist?

I wouldn't mind a female focuses ghostbusters if it was any good but it's looking more and more like a trainwreck. I'll reserve judgement until I see it but I'll be ignoring it if the reviews are ****.

I'm kind of getting sick and tired of the whole tumblr feminist/anti-feminist spiel. Both sides are as awful as one another, there's no excuse for the violence, threats of violence and defamation with the end goal being the ruining of someone's life that is going on on the extremes of both sides.

CiDeRmAn

They have appeared to have delayed the press screenings until day of release, which doesn't engender a sense of hope about it.
But I'll give it the benefit of the doubt, and see what it's like for myself.
The decision to make a female led reboot is... odd, and I'd be suspicious that it's written by committee.
Again, no real idea what it's like until I see it, the trailers seem funny but nothing in it otherwise spells disaster.
Wait and see I guess.

o1s1n

Retr0gamer wrote: »

So am I allowed hate the trailers because the comedy was terrible and it just looks awful without being an anti-feminist?
.

Because apparently these days you're not allowed to just dislike the look of something, it actually means you're housing some deep seated feminist hating pro patriarchy agenda.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

And so what if it's feminist?

I think the problem is that the film that is so driven by the angenda, they have forgotten how to just make a good funny film with an all female cast.

Its just so extremely forced down your throat it totally misses the point.

As I said in the main thread this quote on reddit sums up how I feel about th concept:

"It seems like they were so caught up in making an all female Ghostbusters movie they forgot to make a Ghostbusters movie that just happened to have an all female cast."

For instance in the 2nd trailer you see a stereotypical black female character fall off a stage and say:
"I dont know if its a race thing or a lady thing but I'm mad as hell"

Why the hell would race even come into it?

What a wasted opportunity to have a good punchline thats actually funny.

Instead they'd rather force 2 agendas on you in one line just for the sake of it.

And if you're appauled by the nerd rage surrounding this, imagine the tables were turned.

Imagine the reaction the film would get it if ended with a male cast

Shooting a female monster in the vagina!

I guarantee you there would be far more outrage over it and protests.

If its one thing I hate, its double standards.

Would you be okay with it yourself personally btw?

Feminist cinema has a rich and wonderful history, having given us some of the greatest directors who have ever lived. Frankly, the reaction to Ghostbusters shows feminism is as necessary as it has ever been, even if it's a shame some tumblr-level foundation feminism seems to be all some people think the ideology is.

Its a shame the same can't be said for the new Ghostbusters.

What examples of feminist cinema are you talking about anyway, because i bet they show the feminist cause in a much better and more accurate light.

Its funny you mention tumblr-level foundation feminism, as thats exactly the type potraited in Ghostbusters!

OwaynOTT wrote: »

So there shooting feminists with their proton packs and trapping them in containment fields?
Can see that being very popular with some :pac:

Haha, yeah I know it totally reverses the meaning by calling it that.

A lot of people are calling it Ballbusters instead.

Doge wrote: »

I think the problem is that the film that is so driven by the angenda, they have forgotten how to just make a good funny film with an all female cast.

Have you seen the film? Because nothing in the trailers seems to suggest it's particularly 'agenda' driven. It just looks like a silly studio comedy with a few jokes about gender. If anything, it looks like it could have done with some more bite. But then can't really make a judgement until I've seen it.

"I dont know if its a race thing or a lady thing but I'm mad as hell"

Why the hell would race even come into it?

What a wasted opportunity to have a good punchline thats actually funny.

Instead they'd rather force 2 agendas on you in one line just for the sake of it.

Come now, that's a very mild joke. Maybe not a very good joke, but a joke nonetheless (humour, subjectivity, all that). Should jokes simply completely ignore anything that could potentially be labelled an 'agenda'? If you're offended or displeased by that, you've lead a very sheltered comedy life - stand-up comedy as a matter of course broaches subjects of race and gender in a far, far more confrontational, offensive and provocative way.

Would you be okay with it yourself personally btw?

Depends on the delivery, TBH. All down to context and tone. I think various social conditions have made it much harder to pull off a 'kick in the vagina' joke over a 'kick in the balls' joke - and I'd hope it's obvious why - but again I'd have to take it on a case by case basis.

What examples of feminist cinema are you talking about anyway, because i bet they show the feminist cause in a much better and more accurate light.

Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. The Life of O-Haru. The Piano. Cleo From 9 to 5. Offside. Ten. Vagabond. More recently: A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night. Mad Max: Fury Road. The Punk Singer. Mustang. I think a lot of those are far, far more militantly feminist than something as seemingly mild as Ghostbusters will throw at us

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Come now, that's a very mild joke. Maybe not a very good joke, but a joke nonetheless (humour, subjectivity, all that). Should jokes simply completely ignore anything that could potentially be labelled an 'agenda'? If you're offended or displeased by that, you've lead a very sheltered comedy life - stand-up comedy as a matter of course broaches subjects of race and gender in a far, far more confrontational, offensive and provocative way.

Oh I'm certainly not offended by it! Just displeased at how unhumorous it and how an agenda was thrown into it with very little thought.

It totally compromised any "joke'.

Which is the exact impression I have of the film based on what I know about it online and what ive seen from the trailers.

I certainly won't be going to see it anyway because it looks like utter tripe, even if it was an all male cast.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Depends on the delivery, TBH. All down to context and tone. I think various social conditions have made it much harder to pull off a 'kick in the vagina' joke over a 'kick in the balls' joke - and I'd hope it's obvious why - but again I'd have to take it on a case by case basis.

I can think of a few reasons but enlighten me.

Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles. The Life of O-Haru. The Piano. Cleo From 9 to 5. Offside. Ten. Vagabond. More recently: A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night. Mad Max: Fury Road. The Punk Singer. Mustang. I think a lot of those are far, far more militantly feminist than something as seemingly mild as Ghostbusters will throw at us

Ah okay, I thought you were talking about movies which potraited womens right activists in an accurate light, not militantly feminist characters!

I don't think Ive seen any of the above but I bet Ghostbusters will be non comparable in terms of quality, thats for sure! :pac:

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I think that video deserves to be targeted because, well, it's a sad indicator of where current cultural criticism is at.

Personally I think it's pathetic, there is absolutely nothing sexist or misogynistic about Rolfe's video, yet it's been turned on him to make him look like a sexist because he doesn't like the choices that have been made for the film (not the cast choices). In a grand nutshell, he's stating he won't go & see the film, won't watch it, & won't review it...it's a franchise very dear to his heart, and he's stated in his video, very clearly, calmly, and rationally, why he feels this is so. To label him sexist based on this video, is a real I don't want to live on this planet anymore moment.

The film itself doesn't matter for Rolfe (who, I must confess, I find increasingly intolerable) to give his opinion on how 'awful' it is, which as someone with a deep passion for film criticism is an absolutely appalling stance for anyone to take, especially somebody with a wide audience. Sure, don't go to see the film if you don't want (hundreds of films I ignore every year), but to rant online about it and expect to be taken seriously... good luck to you.

I don't get this one JU, just because he has a few million subs he should keep his opinion to himself on the trailer? Seems a bit of a bizarre notion, I've certainly misinterpreted your point here?

It also ignores the fact that Ghostbusters 'franchise' has already been taken advantage of time and time again - with a subpar sequel and plenty of cartoon / video game spin-offs. Anybody who thinks Ghostbusters 3 would have been anything other than a redundant cash-in is, frankly, deluding themselves

It doesn't ignore anything of the sort though. Not that I'd doubt you good sir, but have you watched the video? He goes on about the Ghostbusters 360 ganme, being a "love letter" to the franchise, & how it's technically the real part 3 of the series. He's well aware of the cheap cash ins too, his AVGN Ghostbusters video attests to that.

Mostly, it represents the obsessive nature of modern fandom, where many people have formed far too close relationships with Hollywood blockbusters. This is Ghostbusters we're talking about - it was always a silly, disposable studio comedy, no matter how much affection one had for it as a child. This whole 'they're ruining my childhood' attitude needs to go away and die in a fire - your childhood is safe, time to be an adult about these things.

You say that, but here as we post, we're all users of a retro gaming forum, who collectively spend tens of thousands of euro per year on purchases most others would similarly describe as silly & disposable. Each to their own, & if Ghostbusters is a franchise hugely close to his heart, who is anyone else to critique that? I didn't particularly feel he took the "ruining my childhood" path either, he simply doesn't like the direction this new one has taken (again, nothing to do with the female cast), and is refusing to contribute to this Hollywood cash in model that's been increasingly seen.

As Devon Faraci noted:

One last note to the "Angry Video Game Nerd" and his friends: the original Ghostbusters was very important to you as a young man. Why can't you be big enough to let the new Ghostbusters be very important to a new generation of young women? Nobody's taking your Venkman away, they're just giving the other half of the population something they can look at and see a reflection of themselves. Wasn't that part of what was cool about watching Ghostbusters when you were young, that you could project yourself into this working class fantasy? Isn't it great that someone else who looks different than you do and who has a different life experience than you do can now have that same fun? That's not taking anything away from you.

Once again, another individual who is quick to push the sexist angle, I've stayed clear of it for this very reason. It's absolute nonsense. The video is anything but sexist. I can't help but feel anyone labeling him as such, didn't watch the video. It's nothing at all to do with gender. This whole point of "just because you don't like the look of it you should shut up, because someone else might like it", is utter garbage too...nobody is forcing people to listen to any particular side of the argument.

Corholio

Wait, is Rolfe actually being seen as sexist by actual sane, thoughtful people? That's absolute rubbish. He set out his case in a very structured and opinionated format imo and goes out of his way, which he shouldn't have to do actually, to steer clear of someone online thinking he's sexist. Lumping him in with 'it's stealing our childhood' reasoning is misguided imo as he doesn't go down that route at all. I don't have a particular fondness that they went out of their way to make an all female cast either, that's not sexist, it's an opinion on the route a film franchise has taken. I'll go see it, it might surprise me, it might not but it seems peoples opinions on films are being watered down to make them accept that films are just 'films' and no opinions should be held on their affection from people or the fact that people may actually hold a film in high regard.

Myrddin wrote: »

Personally I think it's pathetic, there is absolutely nothing sexist or misogynistic about Rolfe's video, yet it's been turned on him to make him look like a sexist because he doesn't like the choices that have been made for the film (not the cast choices). In a grand nutshell, he's stating he won't go & see the film, won't watch it, & won't review it...it's a franchise very dear to his heart, and he's stated in his video, very clearly, calmly, and rationally, why he feels this is so. To label him sexist based on this video, is a real I don't want to live on this planet anymore moment.

I've seen an article that brands him as a "whiney Man-Baby" in the title too.

And for what?

Giving a heart-felt, honest opinion on his feelings towards the direction the franchise has taken?

I can't stand people who automatically brand someone "whiney" for making a genuine complaint about something that interests them regarless of wether its online or not. Everything is onlinethese days.

Its like they're trying to censor any negativity because they cant handle it, they are the true "whiners" imo.

I don't get the hate on youtube reviews either JU, its a platform free for anyone to speak their mind, there are plenty of well informed reviewers on the platform and plenty who are not.

Comes across as a bit pretentious tbh.

As I said, total nonsense. Life is too short

(What I mean by that is the brandishing of people who are critical of the trailer & direction being taken with the movie, as sexists/misogynists because they feel so. No doubt people like that do exist, but they shouldn't even be acknowledged...it's more the way it's become a social weapon to used against those who, for their own genuine reasons, don't like what they see, it's total nonsense. I'm all about equality, but jeez, it sometimes seems equality is outdated these days & we should be offended by everything.)

Myrddin wrote: »

Personally I think it's pathetic, there is absolutely nothing sexist or misogynistic about Rolfe's video, yet it's been turned on him to make him look like a sexist because he doesn't like the choices that have been made for the film (not the cast choices). In a grand nutshell, he's stating he won't go & see the film, won't watch it, & won't review it...it's a franchise very dear to his heart, and he's stated in his video, very clearly, calmly, and rationally, why he feels this is so. To label him sexist based on this video, is a real I don't want to live on this planet anymore moment.

Let me be clear: I am not labelling him sexist, and have suggested nothing of the sort

. I am simply saying I feel his video is deserving of being targeted for criticism for its attempt to legitimise the 'I can judge the film without having seen it' attitude. Put it this way: if the general consensus towards the film is actually generally positive - which is by no means guaranteed, of course - you can surely see how silly Rolfe's video will look? I've seen so many people write off this film as absolute trash, which to me seems quite preposterous based on a trailer. Bad films have had great trailers, and great films have had bad trailers. At least wait until people have seen the movie to write it off, James - this is unlikely to be winning many 'film of the year' awards, after all. But a film should be judged on its own terms, not a two minute trailer thrown together by a marketing team.

And I need to stress I'm all for being more discerning in your viewing choices. I actively avoid superhero films now as I've seen a lot of them and haven't liked them. But at the same time I can't for a second pretend I can give a reasoned opinion on Batman v Superman as I haven't seen it, and shouldn't pretend to be able to

I don't get this one JU, just because he has a few million subs he should keep his opinion to himself on the trailer? Seems a bit of a bizarre notion, I've certainly misinterpreted your point here?

He can say what he wants, absolutely. But I think it's unfortunate for somebody reasonably influential to be saying 'I'm going to hate it' without having actually seen it. I think it has only helped amplify the generally unreasonable hysteria about this film, and while Rolfe is far more articulate than your average random ranting twitter user, I also think the video attempts to rationalise something that's IMO kinda irrational.

It doesn't ignore anything of the sort though. Not that I'd doubt you good sir, but have you watched the video? He goes on about the Ghostbusters 360 ganme, being a "love letter" to the franchise, & how it's technically the real part 3 of the series. He's well aware of the cheap cash ins too, his AVGN Ghostbusters video attests to that.

I simply find it interesting that so many people have chosen this as the line. It's been a well abused franchise, which Rolfe undeniably glosses over, and personally speaking I'd be much more inclined to dismiss a cartoon spin-off than a fresh take on the series by a solid comedy director and cast. Again, I'm not saying everybody hating on this film is a sexist - some are, of course, and I think fundamentally that's why this film has become such a culture war - but there's a general 'white male anger' about this film that seems unusual both in the context of Ghostbusters and indeed general pop culture (no other remake / reboot / sequel - some of which are likely far worse than this will be - has attracted this level of ire), and there's many more reasons behind that than mere misogyny. Certainly plenty to analyse and reflect on once the film is actually out!

Doge wrote: »

I don't get the hate on youtube reviews either JU, its a platform free for anyone to speak their mind, there are plenty of well informed reviewers on the platform and plenty who are not.

Comes across as a bit pretentious tbh.

Doesn't bother me, I am a bit pretentious tbh

I make no apologies for having increasingly little time for the vast majority of YouTube reviewers and commentators. I take film and game criticism pretty seriously, as it's something I'm very interested in, and I think the general standard of discussion seen across much social media - YouTube included - leaves plenty to be desired.

There is absolutely the possibility of great, insightful content on YouTube - Game Maker's Toolkit or Every Frame a Painting are two personal favourite channels. But yes, I have no illusions that I have a pretty specific standards when it comes to discourse about films and games - and sadly the likes of AVGN don't hit my own pretentious mark

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Let me be clear: I am not labelling him sexist, and have suggested nothing of the sort . I am simply saying I feel his video is deserving of being targeted for criticism for its attempt to legitimise the 'I can judge the film without having seen it' attitude.

That'd be fair enough, but that's not what he's being called out for (and I don't mean to imply you are lebelling him as sexist JU, apologies if it came across that way). He's being called out for being a sexist, misogynistic, man baby. On that basis, I feel entirely justified, having watched the video, to rubbish those claims. I'll use the word nonsense once again, and these social "issues", being fanned by the perpetually offended, I find extremely, extremely, tiring. So much so that I remove myself, & get on with real life. There is nothing, absolutely zero, in terms of sexist or misogynistic content within his video...and nobody will ever convince me there is. There is a clear agenda at work here, being perpetuated by utter idiots, and I refuse to get involved.

Put it this way: if the general consensus towards the film is actually generally positive - which is by no means guaranteed, of course - you can surely see how silly Rolfe's video will look? I've seen so many people write off this film as absolute trash, which to me seems quite preposterous based on a trailer. Bad films have had great trailers, and great films have had bad trailers. At least wait until people have seen the movie to write it off, James!

Fair comments, & I certainly won't argue with those. My only contribution here would be if somehow, the film does manage to impress, stays true to franchise roots, has witty, sharp, and engaging comedy, and becomes a lasting beacon of cinema for the youth of today...then Hollywood really needs to look at how trailers are produced. I don't mean to imply the originals were cinema gold, they clearly weren't, but they were able to make a big enough, and importantly, original, impact, that for many, the films are held in really high nostalgic regard. If the new one can do that, fantastic.

And I need to stress I'm all for being more discerning in your viewing choices. I actively avoid superhero films now as I've seen a lot of them and haven't liked them. But at the same time I can't for a second pretend I can give a reasoned opinion on Batman v Superman as I haven't seen it, and shouldn't pretend to be able to

Indeed, we can and should only go on the basis of what we have seen - the trailers. For me, they show a slick, well visually polished looking film (I actually like the look of the effects), but one that completely fails to excite me, engage me, and to be honest, interest me. That alone is enough to warrant me a 'sexist' apparently, and that's the kind of utter nonsense that;s out there, and that's why I avoid it. I didn't find the comedy particularly funny, I found it loud and shouty (the type of comedy I immediately avoid). The fact it's a female cast I'm fine with, totally fine with. Comedy is not the domain of a single gender.

So he's basing his opinion on what he, and the rest of us, have seen so far. I'd have to ask myself the question, would I pay real money to watch that film, after seeing that trailer? The answer for me, and clearly for Rolfe, is a resounding no. It doesn't look good enough, for me, to warrant further consideration. Is that such a crime? If the reviews come in & are glowing, I'll say great, go see it, & then complain about the standard of trailers, but from what's been shown (and they usually show the 'best' parts in trailers these days), I'd be shocked if it's anything better than a passable, generic, and unfunny effort.

He can say what he wants, absolutely. But I think it's unfortunate for somebody reasonably influential to be saying 'I'm going to hate it' without having actually seen it. I think it has only helped amplify the generally unreasonable hysteria about this film, and while Rolfe is far more articulate than your average random ranting twitter user, I also think the video attempts to rationalise something that's IMO kinda irrational.

Again, I won't argue with that logic...you do need to see a film to truly judge it. From Rolfe's video though, it came across to me that he's seen enough to already dislike it (not just the trailers, but the name (he feels cheap cash in), the effects, the sequel/reboot structure, the non character cameos...he explains it better than I can paraphrase it really), and is calling a halt on, "the ghostbusters sequel that nobody wanted". Your point holds up though, and none of this can be guaranteed until the movie is seen. I guess he's not willing to spend money on it, after seeing the trailers. He even acknowledges the film could be good even.

but there's a general 'white male anger' about this film that seems unusual both in the context of Ghostbusters and indeed general pop culture (no other remake / reboot / sequel - some of which are likely far worse than this will be - has attracted this level of ire), and there's many more reasons behind that than mere misogyny. Certainly plenty to analyse and reflect on once the film is actually out!

If I were to guess, I'd say it was young white males that this film had the biggest impact on, all those years ago, and that's the demographic that are so defensive of it, & so against the thrashing of the franchise. Who knows, but if history has shown us anything, this will all die down when the film is out, & there'll be entirely separate and new things out there for people to get offended by. It's all a bit, pointless imo.

TL DR - calling Rolfe out as a sexist is the domain of mind numbingly stupid people, who likely don't even know what sexism actually is. Calling him out for putting his foot down based on a trailer, is a justified, and reasonable objection.

eddhorse

Way too much reading for me.
People looking into it too much, watch it and like it or not.

MrVestek

13615314_10210323345142798_4802643697856144699_n.jpg?oh=d7f4e32b130cfa9f20e91ee310221587&oe=57FC1C31&__gda__=1475329360_20996f531af684168720e333e9e858ce

So I met up with this dude today and we did a bit of game chasing (I helped him to pick up some Irish / UK console exclusives to the PAL region).

Any of you guys into the Dreamcast or Shenmue scene will know who this guy is.

All in all a good day out and a lovely bloke to hang out with!

He was telling me all about a recent trip where he met up with The Game Chasers, Angry Joe, AVGN etc. Unfortunately he doesn't drink but we did have a good time drinking coffee!

Adam Koralik - I like his content

MrVestek

Myrddin wrote: »

Adam Koralik - I like his content

Aye, that's him. Absolutely lovely Gentleman!