expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

It's hilarious how offended some of you snowflakes get over nothing. It's a freakin movie. If it looks good, go see it. If it looks terrible, skip it.

---

Who's offended? It looks hilariously terrible.

---

Mostly the dudes who think an all female cast is an attack on their masculinity. This isn't new, btw. There have been a half a dozen threads about this movie (when it was announced, when it was cast) and about the terrible Ghostbusters remake and for every post saying "this looks bad, I will probably skip it" there were plenty of ridiculous complaints about how unfair an all female cast were and women aren't funny and "more leftist hollywood PC agenda".

---

Anytime a beloved move or show is remade, there is going to be significant opposition. I think most people who have an issue still would regardless of gender.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Sex Panther said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

It's hilarious how offended some of you snowflakes get over nothing. It's a freakin movie. If it looks good, go see it. If it looks terrible, skip it.

---

Who's offended? It looks hilariously terrible.

---

Mostly the dudes who think an all female cast is an attack on their masculinity. This isn't new, btw. There have been a half a dozen threads about this movie (when it was announced, when it was cast) and about the terrible Ghostbusters remake and for every post saying "this looks bad, I will probably skip it" there were plenty of ridiculous complaints about how unfair an all female cast were and women aren't funny and "more leftist hollywood PC agenda".

---

It just shows that women can't come up with their own films. They don't even tweak the name anymore they just rip it off and add an additional X-chromosome (and yes I do mean XXY.)

Looks fun and I like Bullock, so take my money

TCTTS said:

---

This looks legitimately fun to me.

I wouldn't put this in the same camp as the Ghostbusters remake because A) it's a WAY better cast, and B) this is an actual sequel to the first trilogy, not a remake. Bullock is playing Danny Ocean's sister, and if you look closely in one of the final shots, she's visiting his grave. Matt Damon has an extended cameo as well, and Steven Soderbergh, the director of the first three, had a ton of creative input on this one, which counts for a lot in my book.

I still get the "all women redo" / unoriginality factor, though, and that's a fair gripe, but not only would I consider this one an exception to the rule, but a team of women - featuring this cast - stealing diamonds from the Met Ball is a pretty fun premise. That, and as mentioned above, the tagline is pretty damn great too.

I showed the trailer to my mom and sisters, and they, at least, can't wait for this. If it's even halfway good, it'll be a massive hit this summer.

---

Just to carry this forward to the second page because evidently no one read it but me.

Quote:

---

Steven Soderbergh, the director of the first three, had a ton of creative input on this one, which counts for a lot in my book.

---

Is this a good thing? His record with Ocean heist films is hit or miss. 11 was great, but 13 was decidedly meh, and 12 was so terrible and such a transparent money grab that I felt insulted walking out of the theater. I'm wondering if he got lucky with or ran out of ideas after 11.

He's a phenomenal filmmaker who likes to experiment, and the two Ocean's sequels seemed like an excuse to get the gang back together and hang out more than anything.

TCTTS said:

---

He's a phenomenal filmmaker who likes to experiment, and the two Ocean's sequels seemed like an excuse to get the gang back together and hang out more than anything.

---

I loved the third one. Almost more than the first. Probably because Pacino was in it and by this time, the entire cast was in such a groove it was like a fun well-oiled machine.

The second one blew. My God, it's bad.

I think this one looks fun.

11 is easily the best, but 13 is pretty great as well.

One of my favorite bits is the whole Mexican factory subplot.

MooreTrucker said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

This looks legitimately fun to me.

I wouldn't put this in the same camp as the Ghostbusters remake because A) it's a WAY better cast, and B) this is an actual sequel to the first trilogy, not a remake. Bullock is playing Danny Ocean's sister, and if you look closely in one of the final shots, she's visiting his grave. Matt Damon has an extended cameo as well, and Steven Soderbergh, the director of the first three, had a ton of creative input on this one, which counts for a lot in my book.

I still get the "all women redo" / unoriginality factor, though, and that's a fair gripe, but not only would I consider this one an exception to the rule, but a team of women - featuring this cast - stealing diamonds from the Met Ball is a pretty fun premise. That, and as mentioned above, the tagline is pretty damn great too.

I showed the trailer to my mom and sisters, and they, at least, can't wait for this. If it's even halfway good, it'll be a massive hit this summer.

---

Just to carry this forward to the second page because evidently no one read it but me.

---

Just because the filmmaker says it exists in the same universe and you will see Brad Pitt it doesn't mean it isn't a ploy to make a heist film with the same devices as the original, but with vaginuhs

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

11 is easily the best, but 13 is pretty great as well.

One of my favorite bits is the whole Mexican factory subplot.

---

And so what if it is [a heist film with the same devices, but with vaginas]? I don't understand why that idea angers people so much. Is it a money grab? Absolutely. BUT SO ARE MOST MOVIES. It's all a business.

What's wrong with building on already existing IP in a fun way for a new/different audience? This isn't some Hollywood feminist statement or anything like that. Warner Bros. is simply going through their existing franchises looking for ways to continue capitalizing on certain properties and making money wherever they can. They've retooled their Harry Potter franchise with the Fantastic Beasts movies, they're reaching back into Rocky lore with the Creed movies, they're currently trying to find a way to relaunch the The Matrix franchise, and they're simply doing the same here. Only they came to the conclusion that in this case the movie would likely make more money as an all-female sequel rather than bringing the original cast back for a fourth romp, which likely wasn't even a possibility.

Call it cynical, call it unoriginal - and you wouldn't be wrong doing either - but this is the business. And if this is how it has to be, all things considered, this looks fun and somewhat exciting and at least some of the original players are involved. That, and women seem to be truly, genuinely excited for this. So what's the harm in using the Ocean's franchise to give them their own heist movie?

Am I the only person who likes all three Ocean's flicks?

The Mormon brothers steal every scene they're in, btw.

Quote:

---

What you won't see is Harriet Potter, Rockette, a Neo-ess. All three of those franchises exist due to the hero's journey, and audiences simply do not respond as highly to a female lead in that device.

---

Wonder Woman says hi. As does The Hunger Games. Oh, and did you know the lead in the last two Star Wars movies was a female as well?

I mean, it's flat out delusional to think that girls/women don't show up in droves when there's something marketed to them that truly piques their interest, or that a female-centric hero's journey can't bring in an audience just as big as traditional models do.

Literally, two of the three highest grossing movies of the year (Wonder Woman and The Last Jedi) will likely be female-led blockbusters in which, you know, a FEMALE is the central figure in a traditional hero's journey. One of which is an actual mythical Greek figure, a concept of which Jospeh Campbell's hero's journey was partially born. Further, do you know what the current number one movie of 2017 is? I'll give you a hint... it's not called Handsome Guy and the Beast, and you'll never guess what gender the lead is.

All this to say, again, if Ocean's 8 is even halfway decent, it will make an absolute killing this summer, far more than a traditional, male-led fourth installment would have done. It won't do numbers anywhere close to the titles above, obviously, but my only point is that women WILL show up if it's good.

It's not going to be half way decent.

ok_ag95 said:

---

Love the righting in the Ocean films.... w/ a very strong cast on this one.... I'll give it a go!

---

I mean... come on now...

Rev03 said:

---

The 2001 Ocean's 11 was a remake of the 1960s film so it's not like it should be considered an untouchable movie, in my opinion.

---

Eh, it was a remake in that the title and same general plot (let's rob Vegas casinos!) were the same, but that was it. If they'd given it another title, nobody would have called it a remake.

As for this one, I'm just glad Mellisa McCarthy isn't in it. Trailer looks decent, and hot damn Sandra Bullock has aged well. She's still incredibly attractive at 53.