Who Ya Gonna Call?

[Charistoph]

My wife on the other hand saw the trailer and immediately commented "Great, another re-make of something that was good before. Why not make something NEW?"
Which is a good point.

So long as they are actually new characters, I'm mostly fine with it. One thing I hate is seeing actors changed, but it is still the same characters. While I love what they did with some of the characters in the Star Trek movies, I still think it would have been better to have an original crew in that same timeline.

I do think that the possibility of having the main protagonists be all women MIGHT be an in-your-face at misogynists (let's face it, it happens), but I'd have to see how the characters are before I bother making a solid judgement on that being a fact.

[Psychosplodge]

That's certainly an improvement over the last trailer.

[Mr Mystery]

Just thinking....so far, we've not seen the classic Ghost Trap, and certainly the Pistols seem to at least physical disrupt if not disperse Ghosts.

Perhaps we'll see more action in this one, as opposed to the traditional 'form line and fire' required for a Proton Pack?

Though on the ghost trap, we've seen what might be a spectral bear trap type thing....

Still worried Patty is there as Token Black. Much as the crowd surf bit raised a giggle, the reaction was pretty much what we expected to see from dozens of other Token Black's in cinema history (which interestingly doesn't include Ernie Hudson). Though Leslie Jones was a contributor to Def Comedy Jam (a show I know only via Mad Magazine in the late 90's), so perhaps that's just her being her, in the same way Bill Murray has never really acted in his life, as he's always portrayed, well, Bill Murray.

[Denzark]

I've got to admit, I have only seen the first trailer - and I liked it - I thought it had potential.

I was ready to dislike this film, for 2 reasons. Firstly, the concept discussed about remakes. I concur - do something original - or if you absolutely can't, do it bloody well.

The second reason is the selection of an all female cast. If there is a genuine pure plot device that is not a total macguffin and makes sense, I will be happy with that. If it has been done purely in order to advance a feminist agenda, I won't support it with my money.

In terms of true equality, I have no problem with some or all of a group consisting of a certain sex or ethnicity. All sexes are equal, and all ethnicities are equal. But on that basis , where an all female cast is equal to an all male cast - the same is must be true in reverse, with true equality. So I don't have a problem with some, a percentage or all of a group being one thing or another - because they are equal.

I wouldn't expect Aliens to be remade with a male Ripley, I wouldn't expect Thelma and Louise to become Thaddeus and Lou - just to advance a male agenda - likewise Ghostbusters to advance a feminist agenda.

[daboarder]

I've got to admit, I have only seen the first trailer - and I liked it - I thought it had potential.

I was ready to dislike this film, for 2 reasons. Firstly, the concept discussed about remakes. I concur - do something original - or if you absolutely can't, do it bloody well.

The second reason is the selection of an all female cast. If there is a genuine pure plot device that is not a total macguffin and makes sense, I will be happy with that. If it has been done purely in order to advance a feminist agenda, I won't support it with my money.

In terms of true equality, I have no problem with some or all of a group consisting of a certain sex or ethnicity. All sexes are equal, and all ethnicities are equal. But on that basis , where an all female cast is equal to an all male cast - the same is must be true in reverse, with true equality. So I don't have a problem with some, a percentage or all of a group being one thing or another - because they are equal.

I wouldn't expect Aliens to be remade with a male Ripley, I wouldn't expect Thelma and Louise to become Thaddeus and Lou - just to advance a male agenda - likewise Ghostbusters to advance a feminist agenda.

Prepare for a comment that basically ammounts to "its not sexist when I do it" from the expected people

[Kaptain Badrukk]

I'm not the expected person, BUT....
An all female cast is entirely acceptable in the context where the gender of the character has no context, for example you could re-make Alien with a male Ripley and it could work. However you couldn't re-make Thelma and Louise, because the context of the characters and their place in society as women is too great.
It'd be like re-making Queen of the Desert with female strippers.
So I have no problem with an all female ghostbusters, because the gender of the characters is secondary to their role.
But I'd be annoyed by an all female re-casting of a film where maleness was essential to the key characters.
It's not sexist to cast all male, or all female, casts.
It is sexist to suggest that a role which does not hinge on the gender of the character could not be played by either gender (which no-one is doing here, in case you thought I was implying you were).
It is good to see more women leading in action/action comedy roles which have previously been almost entirely the domain of men, especially where science-fiction is concerned.
It is sexist to imply that this might be a bad thing, but NOT sexist to do so based on the individual merits of the actresses vs the previous incumbents of roles in question, just as it is not prejudiced against men to do so by comparing one actor to another (again not saying anyone is judging them for being women).
So no, doing this is not sexist.
Questioning if the actresses can live up to the performances of the original 4, or if the rest of the cast can to the original cast for that matter, is also not sexist unless the questioner uses their gender as a REASON why they are potentially a poor choice.
edit: ALTHOUGH, now I re-read Denzark's post, that is kind what's going on there.
Denzark;
Ask yourself this "Did there need to be a reason why all 4 Ghostbusters in the originals were men?"
The answer is no.
So, since gender is not in any way key to the characters, "Does there need to be a reason why all 4 Ghoestbusters are women?".

[Denzark]

I will resist the urge to go OT and debate why Ripley must be female or you lose the whole 'the alien inside me is a replacement for the child I lost' and the fact that she is the human counterpart to the Alien Queen...

[Path Walker]

Why is an all female main cast accused of being some sort of "Feminist Agenda" move, but an all male main cast doesn't mean anything? Because of Hollywood and western cultures in-built default sexism?

Alien needs Ripley to be a woman because its more threatening when the character on her own is a women, because, well, see above. Aliens plays with the role of motherhood though.

[eldargal]

It goes back to (straight, white)men being the default and everything else being divergent and not actually improtant enough to include except as tokens who are ultimately there to service the male cast (who are still the important ones, of course) by being love interest or whatever.

- - - Updated - - -

I mean evne just taking the Ghostbusters franchise and ignoring the broader issues in Hollywood, we had two all male Ghostbusters movies already (and cartoons and comics and video games), so why is it a big deal to have an all female cast now? Because ultimately in the eyes of too many men (and sadly some women) women aren't important enough to justify that sort of attention. It is supposed to be about them, because everything is, and that is what they deserve.

[Path Walker]

But of course, that's not a symptom of sexism being actively part of our culture by generally showing women to be less important (ie The Patriarchy). Is it daboarder?