Yeah, I think you're reaching hard for an explanation of the general positive review consensus that doesn't cause you cognitive dissonance. All you can come up with is that the reviewers who gave positive reviews made up fake scores and did so out of some political bias and a desire not to let the MRA groups "win," which is absurd because why would they care so much what those groups think? Why would someone risk their professional reputation for a "take that" to TITSORGTFO69 on Reddit? That's why the conspiracy theory originated from those groups in the first place, it increases their already inflated sense of importance. And the idea that there was no conspiracy and they did it spontaneously and individually is even more absurd than the conspiracy theory.
Ghostbusters came out a week earlier and it's box office is below Star Trek Beyond. Now if you're talking just the return, than yeah, because Star Trek cost more to make. You're also talking different studios with different properties and a Star Trek sequel announcement that was made back in July; mostly before the movie opened, or right after it opened.
I think it's better, too. And I liked Suicide Squad OK. I'm not some D.C. hater, either. I'm a huge John Ostrander fan from way back. I follow him on Facebook and I've read every issue of the original series and a few of the lesser reboots. I'd count the Doom Patrol/Suicide Squad Special in my top 5 D.C. books, easily. I wanted Suicide Squad to be great very badly.
Maybe it's just that people can have different opinions?
Last edited by Shawn Hopkins; 08-11-2016 at 12:08 PM.
Pretty much every studio announces plans for the sequel (Ghostbusters also had talks about sequel, no?) to give the impression of confidence in their product. Star Trek got a bit stronger legs and it came out later so Paramount is probably still counting chickens before making any announcements.
It's not a conspiracy theory, a conspiracy would involve collusion among a group of people...which isn't even kind of what I said. You'd have to be blind to not see that there are reviewers that turned this movie into a political stance, and you'd have to have zero understanding of humans if you think none of them may have let that cloud their judgment on this really shitty comedy. This movie is as bad as a number of comedies that get ripped to pieces, but Ghostbusters was practically getting blown by some reviewers. So yes, some, not all, but some reviewers may have given the movie good reviews for ideological reasons as opposed to anything really found on display in the film. Ideology over aesthetic when it comes to movie reviews isn't something you don't see happening, this is just the first time I can think of seeing it happen with something so clearly terrible.
Why do you care what those groups think? You keep going on about MRAs and GamerGate people, clearly you very much care about them and their reactions. Do you think reviewers that go on about the same kind of thing don't care? You think some reviewer that wrote a whole think piece on how people that don't want to see a movie are sexist, or have been talking about those groups you keep bring up for years on Twitter couldn't possibly have a bias regarding a movie they've turned into a line in the sand political stance before it even released? These groups even come up in some of the reviews, even though the whole trailer thing is such an insignificant amount of people that even saw the trailer in the first place...but those people don't care?
It's really funny how here you're saying this idea came from MRAs groups to inflat their sense of importance, (which actually does sound like a conspiracy theory) when before regarding the totally insignificant amount of mean replies on the Ghostbusters trailer you made it sounded like a huge problem that was in not way at all being blown way out of proportion by websites looking for something to write about, and Sony using it as an angle to sell the movie. So which is it? It can't be both. It can't be too big a problem to ignore and too small to matter to them.
There's a difference between the outrage (more coordinated and planned than some will admit) being significant and newsworthy enough for the media to write about and creative people to respond, and mattering enough to reviewers, spontaneously and individually, to compromise their ethics by giving the movie dishonest review scores just to hurt the feelings of angry Redditors and CBR forum members.