Today, Daily Dot’s LOL editor, Miles Klee decided to rain judgment upon one of Youtube's most well known Gaming, Horror, and Classic film critcs for a thought crime. The thought crime in this instance is not wanting to see or review the new Ghostbusters name-make film, knowing he would dislike it on many levels.
Klee, known for such written and thought provoking work as "Welp, this woman just gave birth on Facebook Live" and "I killed your meme, and I don't care" lambasted Rolfe's distrust of the product quality while criticizing several key points why, none of which Klee addressed. Instead, Klee chose to distort a multitude of comments in a tantrum-esque manner.
- The movie's existence means we now "have to" refer to the original as "the 1984 Ghostbusters." Because of the movie title police.
This was in reference of this movies overtly shaky production and poor planning, which has even been timelined. It also came off as a lazy cash grab.
- "If you already know you're going to hate it, why give them your money?" Ah yes, the foundation of all engaged critical thought.
Yes, because consumers should be forced to buy something they clearly never wanted.
- Harold Ramis is dead.
This was in reference to what a monstrosity of a project this has become, and how he is glad he wont be able to see it as a theatrical point.
- "Calling it Ghostbusters without having any connection to the original story or characters... " Rolfe knows this without seeing the movie. That's just the kind of sage he is. This film about busting ghosts bears no relationship to the other movies about ghostbusting.
This was actually mentioned several times in production for anyone following the production of the movie. Side note; Ghostbusters was the name of the group in the movie, to quote a famous Ray Parker Jr song, "who you gonna call, Ghostbusters!"
- "...is a shameless attempt to bank on the name." Right on, brother! You just destroyed Hollywood's entire franchise formula in one fell swoop! Give James Cameron hell! Down with Back to the Future!
This response does not even make sense. (editors note: As a self-described "born troll" you are getting zero out of 10 bottles of bleach. Also who calls themselves a born troll? Next thing I know someone is going to send me a link to your active My Space page, where you talk about cutting yourself while listening to Evanescence because you are just that edgy.)
- It's not a reboot, or a remake, but a "name-make." Which is bad.
Which is an important distinction we really never had before, where production companies piggyback off a known property to try to sell a new one, distancing itself from the original product.
- Han Solo and Chewbacca aren't in it. "The original actors are supposedly playing cameo roles, but not as their characters... like, what the fuck?" Truly, acting is a pox on art.
Once again taking a comment totally out of context, which it was about how to relate new aspects of a property to old aspects of a property; example Han Solo entering the Falcon in episode VII.
Other aspects Rolfe addressed were:
The flat computer special effects, especially in relation to the practical effects of the original movie which are still amazing and have become timeless.
He knows he is biased and states his opinion as such. He does not want to taint something he loves so much.
Being a recreation of sorts, the lore is not reflective of the property. They could have learned from recent reboot sequels like Star Trek and Star Wars but they didn't.
Since the the release of the widely panned trailer for the new Ghostbusters movie, which stars an all female cast, critics of the movie have been labeled sexist by supporters of the film. Currently the trailer has 31.96 million views with almost 800,000 dislikes while being panned by most major outlets.