rpanons | Explosions in the sky

Explosions in the sky

Rundown:

rpanons is an anonymous community for role-play related topics. This place serves as a forum for game discussions, canon discussions, RP solicitations (ATP, game ads, open memes), and advice. The occasional off topic comment is inevitable, but please keep heated social and political topics to their respective communities. Posting them here will only get them frozen. Subsequent threads made to bypass a freeze will then be deleted.

Rules:

Do not post pornographic or shocking images.
Do not share private entries, plurks, chat logs, etc.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.
Do not be redundant. One page does not need three or more threads on one topic/theme. Your unfunny, forced memes also fall under this rule.
Do not treat this comm like your personal therapist. Threads about nonfictional suicide, self injury, rape, and abuse will be deleted. There are better resources out there for you.
Do not treat this comm like your personal Plurk or Twitter. Off-topic happens, but it should be open for discussion and not just a play-by-play of your life. No one cares.
Shut up about Tumblr. If it's not a discussion about Tumblr RP it will be deleted.

CONCERNS | RESOURCES

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

it's just one or two bored shitposters around here. further out on the internet, the mras are throwing a shitfit about FEMALES IN MUH CHILDHOOD and railing against imaginary feminists that think the movie is flawless because women.

so trolls and manchildren. meh.

anon

you know you guys keep claiming that and the only real source of females as leads is bad came from RotK which is different then MRA shitlords. and the shitfits never really happened except in reponse of people claiming shit fits and attacking James Rofle for no reason.

it's almost like the bullshit that anti-gamergate spewed to get people on their side

yes i'm sure this outcry against the movie would be 100% the same if they were all men

meanwhile, in reality:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CnCqTiZWcAAeBzn.jpg

smells like a troll

i'm pretty sure that's your own unwashed shrimpboat smell you're huffing

ok but ive seen multiple women on plurk complaining about how they fucked up "ghostbusters lore"

i cant even

obviously they have externalized soggy knees

the lore that the remake was never beholden to.

if you're going to make a ghostbusters remake and then shit all over the lore to the point that it's unrecognizable, why even call it ghostbusters at all?

paul feig obviously just wanted to make a le edgy sjw movie and knew the only way to get people to see it outside of that market (which is much smaller than it perceives itself) was to build it around a preexisting franchise that could ride the current 80s nostalgia wave

because it still has jumpsuits, proton packs, ghost busting, the ecto-1, etc.

it's the icongraphy that matters, not the minutia of the lore. they can cross the streams and make gozer's servants into baby tapirs and it won't fucking matter so long as the primary icongraphy is there.

ghostbusters isn't made up of a series of rules, it's made up of a series of images and gags. that's the spirit of the original. getting hung up on anything else just makes you a nerdlord, tbh.

and yet reviews are still calling it a 'pale shadow of the original' in tropes

it takes more than iconography to make a remake work, tumblrina. if iconography alone was enough stuff like the tasm movies and fantastic four would have been hits, they did hit all the major beats. but if you just include the iconography as window dressing and miss the soul of what made the original good you get... well, a trainwreck like fantastic four. or ghostbusters.

in droves*, ugh

don't you even start your autistic rebutling tonight, pixlenon

but both "pale shadow of the original" and "miss the soul of what made the original good" basically just mean "it's based on a thing I like, but I don't like this one and I can't really specifically explain why" which is a perfectly fine opinion to have but it doesn't really substantiate anything

then again I unironically enjoyed all four live-action transformers movies so what do I know

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-12 22:29 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-13 03:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-13 03:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: da

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-13 23:32 (UTC) - Expand

stop trying to engage a shitposter in good faith. it never works.

only a shitposter feels the need to call people who think they're wrong shitposters

they may not be a shitposter and may be someone legitimately so bootyblasted by the mere existence of "SJWs", who apparently are just ruining everything, that anything that doesn't toe the alt-right media criticism line gets this kind of a response.

in which case engaging either in good faith won't work, but eh. I felt like saying it.

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-11 14:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-11 14:34 (UTC) - Expand

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-11 14:38 (UTC) - Expand

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-11 14:41 (UTC) - Expand

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-11 14:52 (UTC) - Expand

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-12 06:44 (UTC) - Expand

you know you say that but on the other hand

Dragonball Evolution

le edgy sjw movie

you know you just outed yourself as a child, right?

tumblr -------------- >

anon who is excited to go see ghostbusters and

a woman complaining about inaccuracies in a movie doesn't mean she thinks it's a mistake to make one for the same reasons that most of the male fanbase thinks it's a mistake to make one

i'll take another remake as an example of this: i refused to go see the ninja turtles reboot because i didn't like the way the turtles look or how they cast april o'neill. however i'm entirely willing to also accept that my reasons for thinking it's a bad movie at the time were entirely subjective and also very shallow! and if a lot of the dudes railing against the movie would stop trying to hide their disdain for it in thinly-veiled critique, i'd respect their opinions on it a lot more than i do.

and i actually do respect their opinions on it- but i don't respect their actions. i didn't like the new ninja turtles so i didn't see it. i had one conversation with one person about how much i thought it looked like absolute diarrhea. once. i did not do my best to suppress good reviews of the movie, despite the terrible things i eventually did hear about it. and if you're thinking, "well you're just not that attached to it," ninja turtles was my childhood just as much as ghostbusters was theirs. i had two popcorn tins FULL of ninja turtles. i had at least 10 VHS tapes i absolutely wore out of the cartoon. i used to waste all of my money playing the games at the arcade. i wanted to be raphael when i grew up. i still love the first live action movies, even the third one. i'm totally okay with people not liking something, because there's tons of things i don't like, too. and maybe even not being able to explain why you don't like it is fine, too. but going out of your way to try to make it unsuccessful just says to me that these guys aren't worried about something ruining they're childhood- they actually haven't progressed PAST childhood.

also most of the reviews i've read have been skewed positive, so. joke's on you. see you at ghostbusters 2

tumblr ------------ >

wood chipper ------------ >

40 gallon drum ------------ >

albuquerque ------------ >

Re: GHOSTBUSTERS

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-12 17:26 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only