FLOP! New Feminist ‘Ghostbusters’ Toys Already on Clearance Before Movie Opens

Posted on | July 11, 2016 | 65 Comments

The question about the feminist remake of Ghostbusters now seems to be not whether the movie will fail, but how bad its failure will be:

Toys for the new movie are already on clearance shelves in stores across the country.
While Sony and many media outlets would have you believe that the early criticism of the new movie is coming from a small minority of mouth-breathing woman haters, in reality the majority of the fandom is extremely put off by the reboot. . . .
To give the toys the benefit of the doubt, part of the poor sales could be in part due to young boys not wanting to play with female action figures and girls just not playing with action figures much at all. But whatever the reason for the clearance, it certainly is strange that toys for a yet-to-be released film are already getting shooed off the shelves.

Is it “sexism” to admit that boys and girls are different? Are we now so intimidated by political correctness that people are afraid to say that sexual role-reversals usually produce unhappiness and failure? Is it misogyny to say that feminist “gender neutral” ideology is simply wrong?

If the new Ghostbusters proves to be “a disaster of biblical proportions,” what should we expect Hillary Clinton’s presidency to be? How long before feminism ruins America and we end up on the clearance rack?

Category: Movies, Sex Trouble

Comments

65 Responses to “FLOP! New Feminist ‘Ghostbusters’ Toys Already on Clearance Before Movie Opens”

Quartermaster
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:41 am

“Is it “sexism” to admit that boys and girls are different?”
No it’s not sexist, but it’s probably a hate crime.
Dana
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:51 am

Some movies should never be remade.
robertstacymccain
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:52 am

Facts are the New Hate.
Dana
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:54 am

I’m trying to picture a remake of Casablanca, with — assuming that it is set in WW2 — Sigourney Weaver as the female underground leader, Jane Lynch as Major Strasser, Ryan Reynolds as Ilsa, and Geena Davis as Rick.
Dana
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:55 am

Of course, any modern remake of Casablanca might be set in our apocalyptic global warming future.
RS
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:05 pm

I’ve come to the conclusion that movies like the new Ghostbusters aren’t really intended to succeed, but rather constitute modern “Danegeld” paid to keep those like Anita Sarkeesian at bay. The barbarians can’t contribute any real money making ideas, but they have the ability to summon hordes of easily aggrieved dolts to make a business’s life miserable. Thus, it’s easier to proffer the occasional commercial turd, then deal with the constant haranguing by the harridans of the Left.
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:13 pm

About two decades ago there was a film, Barbed Wire, starring Pamela Anderson. I watched it, expecting some mindless chases and explosions. No high expectations, just wanted to watch a mindless shoot ’em up action flick.

About halfway through I realized it was a remake of Casablanca, with Anderson in the role of Rick (I almost typed “Rick role” and realized how that would sound read aloud). And that ruined it for me. It stopped being a fun action movie and became a vile travesty.
gunga
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:14 pm

The market is cruel to “smart” people with stupid agendas.
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:15 pm

Waiting for the SJWs to start explaining to us how, under capitalism, sellers will voluntarily throw away money to make a social point…

The sad fact, which no amount of earnest femsplaining will reverse, is that retailers sell what sells. Doesn’t matter what it is, if they can make money on it it goes on the shelves. If they can’t, they get rid of it.
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:16 pm

Reality is a bitch.

Which fact alone, so expressed, ought to gratify feminists. But for some reason they take no comfort in it.
Jeanette Victoria ?????????
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:24 pm

Yup “HateFacts”
robertstacymccain
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:31 pm

“… modern ‘Danegeld’ paid to keep those like Anita Sarkeesian at bay.”

Exactly — feminism is a protection racket, forcing corporations to pay shakedown money to “prove” they are not sexist, thus buying insurance against accusations of discrimination.
Jeanette Victoria ?????????
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:37 pm

When Hollywerid started to make movies as social statement I stopped watching. I don’t remember the last time I went to the theater. Hubby and I have a large collection of movies from the 40’s and 50’s
Dunning Kruger
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:45 pm

On clearance at Target — perfect.

“When there’s something creeping in your bathroom stall, who you gonna call? SOCIAL JUSTICE!!”
CrustyB
July 11th, 2016 @ 12:47 pm

If Target sells them, can men take them into the ladies’ room to play?
concern00
July 11th, 2016 @ 2:23 pm

Sat down to watch Exodus Gods and Kings (I know, really bad idea) last night. I knew I was in for a troubling ride when the opening scene started with 1400 BCE.
BSR
July 11th, 2016 @ 2:36 pm

Maybe it is because I was raised to be a more conventional girl and I liked playing with dolls and action figures but I also had a little brother and I used to get toys that were similar to his so that I could play with him. I had some matchbox cars (not as many as he did) and transformers. We both had sets of Construx. I didn’t have any He-Man dolls but he had Tee-la so when we played I usually played with that one.

One thing rings universally true to me, and that is that those action figures are incredibly ugly. Action figures are often pretty darn ugly. I have never really found much appeal in the female ones. Wonder Woman never looked good with plastic moulded hair. Maybe it’s that awful heteronormative programming but many of my friends growing up were girlier than I am and they would have rejected those hideous action figures outright. Now the cast members of the movie aren’t necessarily hideous women but action figures rarely do attractive subjects justice so how can you expect them to do much for average looking women?
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 2:48 pm

I expect that Disney Princesses merchandise is still selling very well. Girls like cute and glamorous and in general shy away from direct competition, so a butt kickin’ feminist role model is not going to appeal to a lot of them, most especially one that eschews traditional femininity.
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 2:52 pm

I recently read that one of the producers of this film got in serious hot water with Sony when her e-mails were released as part of that purported NorK hack.

She was one of those joking about what films Obama would like, and listing Django and Twelve Years a Slave. Not exactly Earth shattering Klan level racism, in fact more like a heavy handed attempt to be funny. But she got in deep kimchee over it.

So this new SJW Ghostbusters is probably an attempt to redeem her progressive street cred.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
July 11th, 2016 @ 3:05 pm

I still say an all female Animal House could be a winner.
Durasim
July 11th, 2016 @ 3:30 pm

They’ll never see as well as the “Philadelphia” action figures.

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/philadelphia-action-figures/2868164
BSR
July 11th, 2016 @ 3:36 pm

She-ra kicked some major butt, as did Gem and the Holograms but they did it while being glamorous and wearing high heels. Girls like glitter and they like to glow when they kick butt because that just makes it super awesome butt kicking. Plus She-ra had a unicorn with rainbow wings.

If they wanted to sell action figures they should have amped up the glitter and fashion appeal of those ghost-busting duds and made the ghost trapping guns shoot glitter. The movie would have been better too!

The Ecto-1 and the rugged working-man aspect of the ghostbuster costume had a manly appeal to it but it’s not a womanly look at all. I always felt like the Ecto-1 was kind of a nod to the Blues Brothers which really wouldn’t have worked as the Blues Sisters.

I think it’s a big mistake to try to erase traditional gender expectations. Women thrive as the underdog and unexpected hero. If you take away the ‘unexpected’ part of that equation you’re putting a lot of weight on women that doesn’t belong there. I’m also intensely bothered by the notion that transgendered athletes are allowed to compete in all women’s leagues. Those leagues exist separate because of the differences physiologically between men and women. I don’t care if a man had his thing whacked off, he’s still a man biologically which means he should not be competing with women in a women’s league. If they want to have a transgendered league, then they ought to spend the money and make one.
marcus tullius cicero
July 11th, 2016 @ 3:53 pm

…got to see the movie yesterday, 99% special effects, .5% humor, .5% gas!
A Bogart Fan
July 11th, 2016 @ 3:58 pm

Ugh. I wondered why I hated that movie. At the time, I didn’t see the caricature of a fine old classic, I saw a stupid script line with insipid acting and hysterical theatrics.
That might have been a defensive mechanism on my part. Or it was so bad that took special talent to discern the non-originality of “Barbed Wire”. Hollywood has lost nearly all its originality.

I watched it to the end, just to see if Anderson’s character bought the farm. Alas, she did not.
RS
July 11th, 2016 @ 4:09 pm

How about an all-Lesbian Casablanca where Victoria Lazlow and her lover Ilsa are fleeing Nazi persecution of homosexuals?
M. Thompson
July 11th, 2016 @ 4:28 pm

My niece whose 6 really likes pink sparkly things. And then we’ll run around the yard with some yellow airplanes.
Jeanette Victoria ?????????
July 11th, 2016 @ 4:57 pm

So is homosexuality…
Joe Joe
July 11th, 2016 @ 5:43 pm

“sexual role-reversals usually produce unhappiness and failure”

Their mistake was in taking an iconic movie and trying to replace males with females. Had they developed something new with female leads–a risk, but a good one under the circumstances–they’d have done more respectably. Three women fighting bad guys is not a new idea; think Charlie’s Angels. It was trying to co-opt the brand that led to the failure.
Kurt
July 11th, 2016 @ 6:12 pm

But would YOU go to see it?
Steve Skubinna
July 11th, 2016 @ 6:30 pm

That, and the heavy handed messaging.

“If you don’t love this film you’re a racist! I mean, a sexist!”
Adobe_Walls
July 11th, 2016 @ 6:33 pm

Isn’t America already on the clearance rack?
Adobe_Walls
July 11th, 2016 @ 6:42 pm

At Christmas and Birthdays I’m still buying Elsa toys from Frozen for my grand daughter.
AZfederalist
July 11th, 2016 @ 7:17 pm

I am so stealing that.
Daniel Freeman
July 11th, 2016 @ 8:18 pm

Aha! I was confused, since all I could remember was upskirt of a petite blonde, and it turned out that I was thinking of Bird on a Wire. That had Mel Gibson, Goldie Hawn, and the mindless chases and explosions that you were looking for.
Daniel Freeman
July 11th, 2016 @ 8:24 pm

Well that’s stupid. Everyone knows that “once you have paid him the Danegeld/ You never get rid of the Dane.” Rudyard Kipling proved it by putting it into a poem, so the science is settled.
Daniel Freeman
July 11th, 2016 @ 8:32 pm

Ha! Isn’t it weird how everyone decided to mark the Common Era from an arbitrary year of no particular significance? And certainly of no relevance to a full and proper exegesis of Exodus!
robertstacymccain
July 11th, 2016 @ 8:34 pm

The trend of the past 20 years, trying to cash in on existing brand loyalty by remaking franchise products — usually movies satirizing beloved old TV series — just demonstrates how little creative talent exists in Hollywood. Go back and watch some of the better movies of the 1970s and ’80s — Jaws or Fatal Attraction, just to cite two titles — and notice how the plot, the characters, the action and the dialogue work together. Now, everything is comic-book stuff with CGI effects. It’s as if everybody forgot how to make a real thriller, or even a Nora Eprhon-style “meet cute” romantic comedy.
Robert What?
July 11th, 2016 @ 8:57 pm

I plan to not see the new Feminist Ghost Busters, the new Feminist Iron Man, and the talked about new feminist James Bond. In fact I plan to not see them all at the same time.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
July 11th, 2016 @ 9:22 pm

If it was funny (and you could make that hilarious) sure. You would have to parody feminists relentlessly.

Feminists have no sense of humor, but they can be parodied to be funny.
concern00
July 11th, 2016 @ 9:49 pm

“If your calendar is dated on of (sic) all the human beings who have ever walked on the earth, and your calendar is dedicated and predicated to just one of them, evidently something rather large went down back then.” Phil Robertson “The Duck Commander”
Hurri Cane
July 11th, 2016 @ 11:35 pm

I’d be remiss not to point out that i bought all the Classic Ghostbusters in this scale as soon as i saw them
Daniel Freeman
July 12th, 2016 @ 12:08 am

Ha! I’m already not seeing them!
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:05 am

I’d actually like to be IN that movie. Dibs on the Bluto part.
HansonBro
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:08 am

In the real world, every executive who signed-off and managed this disaster would be fired immediately.

In Hollywood, they are championed and promoted.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:10 am

They’ve never met a reality that they liked.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:13 am

By putting it on clearance at Wal-mart. But alas, even Wal-mart doesn’t have the chops to unload those duds.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:14 am

No way! Social justice IS the thing that’s creeping in your bathroom stall.

I say, call the NRA. Or maybe Westboro Baptist.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:15 am

Evidently, men can do anything they want in the ladies’ room at Target.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:21 am

The Ghostbusters remake needed more dancing, too. Spangley costumes and dancing. And singing. And fashion accessories that had hidden weapons and communication devices. And they wouldn’t be busting ghosts, but the mean girls in school instead.

That version would’ve been a lot better.
DeadMessenger
July 12th, 2016 @ 4:22 am

I’m 50 years older, and those things still sound like fun to me.