Aww, I thought it'd be He-Man (remake)!
The line is "Aww MAN, I thought it'd be He-Man!" For shame!
Seriously though, Brad, did you ever get around to seeing Dogf*cker 2? Like most sequels having a tough act to follow it just missed the mark. I mean, to this day I still love the eccentric, comic relief sidekick puppy & how about that pack of sewer dogs that guard the outside of a museum? Alas, the main villain dog, that Carpathian cocker spaniel was SO boring. The returning cast was still funny.
Eh, bad cgi dog logs aside, maybe they'll have a better villain. I'm sure they'll find some willing hell hound. . .
I think the all female He-Man remake doesn't get the original.
Hey, at least we're getting an all-male She-Ra too.
Without clicking, I'm already guessing it's the new Ghostbusters. Yeah, Rolfe made the same declaration.
Ah. Okay, that was funny.
Now don't you just feel silly.
Good for both of them.
Sadly I was hoping for a Pod People remake with Hayden Christenssen as Trumpy.
I love you Mr Jones
Why are people throwing such a fit over this movie? Terrible remakes have been going for years, why is this the one that suddenly broke the camels back?
Um, did you not SEE the original Dog Fucker? It's a classic!
Exactly, it's 2016 people! There have been dozens of remakes and they have overwhelmingly sucked. Poltergeist, Point Break, Jurassic World, and Terminator Genesys just came out last year, and this a bridge too far?
I think people are just getting tired of reboots and remakes. The Industry is too scared to try a slightly new idea for fear of losing money so they decide to redo a classic they think guarantees money.
You'd think we've learned from Caddyshack 2.
IT'S CURRENT YEAR!!!! CURRREEEENT YEEEEEAAAARR, PEOPLE!!! Current year!!!
At least there is still hope for Violent Shit and Criminally Insane Snobs.
I knew from the second I saw the title of the video this was going to be a parody, but still, amusing. Didn't know until seeing the Youtube comments it was of something in particular instead of the general reaction.
As for Ghostbusters... Personally, I haven't even seen the original and don't really have any interest in doing so, so not terribly likely I'll ever see the remake.
Though to be fair, this also properly encapsulates my feelings on the upcoming Rocky Horror Picture Show remake.
But Rocky Horror Show is a play! It's been remade over and over all over the world with every new cast.
Hence why I said "The Rocky Horror PICTURE Show." They're remaking the movie on Fox TV, and the cast and director don't look promising.
No matter what, I'm seeing the new Ghostbusters and judge it for myself! I don't know if James Rolfe himself ever watch your videos Brad, but I'm sure even he can appreciate your humor!
I agree completely! Why not check it out. I've gone to see movies that I was excited about and eager to see, and ended up hating them, and been dragged to the theater to see movies I've had no hope for, and ended up enjoying them. Who knows until you see it
"Why not check it out."
Because I follow a few critics with tastes similar to mine.When they agree on a film,its a pretty safe bet that Ill share that opinion.So Ill just wait and see what they have to say about it.
So yes,its perfectly possible to know in advance whether youll like something or not.
I believe in voting with your wallet. I wouldn't be seeing Ghostbusters just like I didn't see Robocop, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Evil Dead, Vacation, or any other pointless remake.
I won't see remakes. Period. I don't care if they're decent or not. Not going to support that shit.
So you never saw the thing(1982)?Invasion of the body snatchers(1978)?The fly(1986)?Little shop of horrors(1986)?Because if you watched any of those(and a plethora more),you ARE supporting that shit.
I won't see remakes = won't see in theaters
You know that outside of a few exceptions (dawn of the dead) these remakes are soulless cash grabs
Hired directors like Fede Alvarez, José Padilha, Samuel Bayer just don't stack up against visionaries like John Carpenter & David Cronenberg
But you have somewhat of a point, so let me change my stance: if another great director (Tarantino, Jackson, Fincher, Nolan, etc) does a remake, I'll go see it.
Hey, Nick, I don't know how to tell you this but...Vacation and Evil Dead weren't remakes. Both were additions to the existing series. Just trying to help you out. Died for your sins. Later, bro.
Same concept as original - Check
Same name as original - Check
That's a remake in my book. Throwing in a cameo with the original stars does not make a sequel.
did you see evil dead 2 because its a remake they had to remake evil dead because sam and bruce did not have right to evil dead 1 at the time so if you did they yea you saw a remake and wording is everything your initial post will alway haunt you even with your silly back peddling earlier srry no time for punctuation
I admitted my position was flawed and adjusted it. Why is it silly to change my mind?
I didn't care for evil dead 2 and I thought the remake part was poorly done.
Man, I can't believe they're remaking this! Hollywood has run out of ideas. Well, they've touched my childhood inappropriately for the last time!
I've used the same Dog Fucker lunch box every day since I was in second grade. Ever since the trailer for the remake was released I've been utterly ashamed to be seen carrying it in public.
I legitimately thought you were going to refuse to see the Rocky Horror remake. Know that this isn't something you typically do (Obviously where this awesome video came from), I really thought that that...thing...might have driven you to drastic measures. Well, since you'll probably still watch that, let me know how it is, because I'm sure as shit not watching it.
I think we all should listen to Nerf Herder's Ghostbusters III now...no one sums the feelings of misspent youth and lost love like Parry Grip!
But it would take a real asshole to remake Water Power.
They would make quite a lot of enem-ies in the process.
I'm sure they'd be under plenty of pressure.
Good for you Brad! I have a lot of respect for Rolfe, but I think he's wrong on this one, Oh the movie may very well be terrible, but that's what you all do! And his point about the title, and having to refer to a specific year of the film, really? Haven't we all managed just fine with The Thing, Dawn of the Dead, etc. Yet another reason you're my favorite critic.
No we need to take stand on this one, we can't have Hollywood ruin any more classics. These bastards are going steal the name of a timeless movie and put on a bunch of forgettable terrible looking CGI crap.
By the way have you seen the new Ben Hur trailer? That shit looks awesome! The dude is surfing sideways on a chariot going AHHHHHH and it's got Morgan Freeman in it.
Yes, I agree. But where the fuck was the outrage when Robocop came out? Better late than never, I guess
sooo ill give this argument there are a lot of crap remake but every once in awhile they do it right and we get a new classic its not always about saying never remake but saying let give it a shot. i know its not the most likeable argument but it has happened before why is it impossible to happen again
Bwahahaha - ow! ow! laughter stitches. Damnit Brad, you trolling muddafadda ....ya got me.....now I gotta replace ma unnerwears! (That was seriously hilarious! love ya buddy!)
Ugh, I knew I shouldn't have watched Brad's remake of James Rolfe's "Ghostbusters 2016. No Review. I refuse". It's an inferior remake in every way.
First, the tile "Brad Refuses to Review an Upcoming Remake". Obviously a clickbait title, designed to make you watch his film to know what film he is talking about. Rolfe's title perfectly encapsulates his thesis, leaving no doubt from the very second you see it his stance. Such superior titleship. I felt strung along by Jone's video, waiting to know with which film remake he took umbrage.
Second, the cinematography. Rolfe's video is perfectly shot and structured, leaving him just left of center to allow room for graphics and showcasing his wonderful setting. Jones, of course, prefers to place himself narcissistically front and center to make it all about him, allowing no room to showcase stills and screenshots of either the original or remake of Dog Fucker, thus forcing myself to google the films for reference material. Not that we want to see what is going on in the background, what with the same shot as his other films. Find a more dynamic way of shooting!
Finally, the content. Rolfe's protest film was a brave call to arms against the Hollywood system of soulless remakes of past franchises simply for financial gain. Jones's remake fails to do exactly what a remake is supposed to do: rehash the same material. Upon repeated viewings, you'll notice that Rolfe's protest is against the upcoming remake of Ghostbusters, whereas Jones's protest is against the remake of Dog Fucker. CLEARLY not the same film! How dare you, Jones? You had ONE JOB with your remake of Rolfe's protest against a remake, and you failed!
But the film was less than 4 minutes. So I give this 3 out of 4 stars.
Personally, I thought Brad's minimalist approach and natural setting had the immediacy of a Cassavetes. Whilst the satire was a post-modern delight of expectations at once thwarted and yet fully realised.
Of Rolfe's original the less said the better. The message was preachy. A fault only compounded by the empty formalism of the framing. Worse still by the end of this meandering stew of nostalgia, self-pity, self-justification and self-righteousness it had negated its desired purpose. The viewer instead was left with a renewed determination to se the object of Rolfe's Ire, Ghostbusters 2016, if only to spite the all too prevalent dogma of man-child neo-nerdist faux trauma. .
Dang, you had the same idea I had, albeit here instead of Youtube. Now I know how Observe and Report felt when it came out at the same time as Paul Blart: Mall Cop <.<
Sexist, thick-saliva swallowing pig.
Oh come on Brad, at least see it before you criticize it. It's just like Patton Oswalt said, our society will implode because you chose to nitpick Dogfucker 2016 before you actually saw it. It's gross. Though it's perfectly okay if you say you'd like to travel back in time and murder George Lucas with a shovel.
I'm going to give Patton Oswalt a pass on this one. I'd probably be upset if someone was talking ill about a project my late wife was involved in too. No matter how innocuous the criticism was.
Holy shit. I...I think I might have just offended by a joke. The whole concept of taking offense at comedy as always struck me as alien and somewhat silly, but this joke might have finally gotten me. Well done, I suppose.
Oh wow, I didn't know that his wife was involved in it and now I can understand why he would get involved and be upset. I actually do really like Patton Oswalt and actually did agree with the point he was making, but I don't know I just didn't agree with the way he was going on about it. James's video was nothing like other nitpick for the sake of nitpicking videos I've seen.
Tim, don't know what to say but sorry to offend. I thought that that's why Brad did the video because in response to the Twitter conversation so I actually was just trying to be that jackass that jumps in to the discussion because it looks fun. Though the fact that I caused someone to have some kind of reaction should make me feel good?
Wow. So the movie is so bad it actually killed his wife. And yet he's still defending it?
Did anyone else fine this hilarious and agree with a bunch of what James said? It did seem to come out of nowhere and be a little bit unnecessary. But, i agreed with a lot of his points. I mean the only reason that I'm even going to give this movie a chance is because Brad said that Paul Feig movies tend to have really horrible trailers. By the way I feel the same about a remake of Dog Fucker, but let's face it, Dog Fucker 2 already ruined that franchise.
Anyway, I'll just wait Midnight Screenings review. I trust Brad won't send me to a piece of shit.
I don't understand. What is it about the remake of DogFucker that's casing such umbrage that critics (well, Brad at least) are flat out refusing to see it?
It's a remake. You go, chances are there'll be some things you like about it but more things you won't, so you do your review with whatever Piss, vinegar, and anger you feel is appropriate for the moment, then go home, pop The Dogfucker Quintology in the Blu-Ray Player (or are you lucky enough to have the new 4K?!), grab a Mashkey Yogurt Soda, and relax.
I still say the first two seasons of The Real Dogfuckers were the height of the franchise, before the studios interfered.
Haha, this is so good! Does anybody else now actually wish Dog Fucker was a real movie or TV show ? Brad get on it!
I forgot to google from fear of the results I'd get, but yeah you're right I thought Brad just made it up. I guess I need to brush up on early 70's porn.
Bullshit, Brad. You just hate poodles.
Damn straight. The only people that don't like the Dog Fucker trailer are lonely virgins on their German Shepard Rights Activist forums. There is literally no other reason to not LOVE it than if you are a poodle hating loser!
I don't follow Rofle, so when I read the first tweet and saw this video I really thought there was a remake of Dogfucker for a second there.
Personally, I find Jones's distaste for a remake hypocritically reprehensible, since he spoke so highly of a notorious John Carpenter remake: Halloween, which was a "too soon" remake of Bob Clark's Black Christmas, which essentially took the "holiday-themed slasher" premise of the original but barely left anything else intact. Such faithless remakes/adaptations would continue to plague Carpenter's career, such as 1982's The Thing, which most people mistaken for a remake of Howard Hawk's The Thing From Another World; it's actually the very first cinematic adaptation of a Marvel Comics character, but one that is so unfaithful to the original character that Marvel refuses to acknowledge ANY connection between their character and the film to this day!
Brad just torrent the new Dog Fucker remake that way you wont feel dirty for paying for it!
I'm also not planing on seeing the remake of Dogfucker, but I AM gonna see the reboot of Ghostbusters. Suck it, haters.
GOD DAMN IT BRAD YOU JUST DID THIS TO TRICK US INTO GOOGLING BEASTIALITY.
... Actually that was pretty funny. I hope James has a good sense of humor.
For me it wasn't the trailer, it was the release of the villain for the movie who is just the ghost from the logo with fangs. You had a Sumerian god, then a demonic warlock, and now you're just not bothering to try. I would have gotten Peter Dinklage dressed as Donald Trump with samurai swords, and that would be far more menacing.
The video game is a much better reboot.
Nah, still avoiding the Ghostbusters remake. If it gets okay reviews, I might catch it on Netflix, but that first trailer killed any interest I had in it.
Or relaunch or reboot or whatever it is that we're calling it, the whole thing seems slapped together.
Ones that look like as lazy and cash-grabby as Ghostbusters should probably just be called "rehashes", rather than remake/reboot/reimagining/rewhatever.
That was my reaction to seeing the first trailer. I don't use Netflix (or any of those scam sites) so I'll be skipping it too. Don't give a damn about the reviews; it will suck.
I had no clue that this was a parody of another video until after I watched it and I still found it hilarious as simply a satirical retort to the over reaction of any remake (particularly for "Ghostbusters"). Now that I know the context and have now seen the other video, yours is even funnier to me. Great job, Jones. You can put out content that can make me laugh my ass off without having any knowledge as to what you're making a parody of. Right on.
I'm confused. Is Brad making fun of Cinemaassacre and showing how absurd his reasons are for not seeing a reboot movie - or is Brad actually not seeing the new Ghostbusters movie?
Because personally I hope it's the former, because that Cinemamassacre post is straight up bullshit. I really don't think Brad, as a professional film critic, is going to "boycott" the movie because it's a reboot? Seriously?
Brad can you clarify: are you or are you not going to see the new Ghostbusters movie? Is this video a parody of CinemaMassacre ridiculous video?
Okay on rewatch of the video, I think it's a parody. It's quite funny actualy in hindsight, and the perfect response to total bullshit.
Seriously though, sarcasm is one of the hardest things for my Aspie brain to detect. I tend to take things on face value.
So, uh...no need to answer, Brad. I'm just slow. :)
Same here, a little slow on interpreting but I don't think Brad would be negative except for humor's sake.
Did you even watch the video? He's refusing to watch the Dogfucker remake.
I can't tell if you're serious or joking....so I'll answer you as if you're serious.
I understand that Dogf**cker was a euphemism for gb2016, it just seemed to me on the first view that Brad's reasons for not watching the remake was genuine. Of course now I realize it as sarcasm.
The best way to explain my POV is this: I'm not Brad - mentally, that is. I don't have Brad's taste for movies - but I enjoy his reviews of them. It's...educational. I have absolutely no interest in the movies, and half the time I don't get the jokes until much later. I don't watch any horror or porn...or porn horror, which I consider Dogf**cker to be, atleast to me. So I really have no gauge on what Brad would find unacceptable as a remake of a distasteful porn movie. However it seems reasonable to me that he would use it as an example of why he didn't want to watch gb2016. He likes those movies, it seemed genuine. I thought he was serious, I thought he was trying to explain it in his way. I do that all the time when people don't understand why I like the things I like, and I use metaphors I know. However, I don't understand his reasons, I just accept it. I have a lot of difficulty understanding what most people like and dislike, so I just accept most of what people say with out logically understanding it. But now I understand it was a parody. Understand?
If you were joking...ignore all of the above. Good one.
I didn't read all that, but I really have no idea what Brad is trying to say with this video. I know he is almost definitely going to watch & review Ghostbusters, though.
Brad has said in the past that he doesn't consider himself a critic, more of a comedian who talks about movies.
Okay, I can understand that Patton would be upset about this based on his wife's passing. However, he personally attacked James as if he was aware of this and hated on the film because his wife was in it. He took it too personally and really comes off as the bad guy here. I'm not sure if Brad is attempting to really insult James or just playing a joke I am bad at reading people, but it does come off negative to me, which is a shame because you are the only one I like watching on CA. I would not like to see conflict between you two.
He's admitted now he was in the wrong by going after James like that, he kind of apologized on Twitter by saying that he picked the wrong target and it was foolish of him. So I guess he just made the bad mistake of getting a little carried away. I don't think Brad is insulting James, I think he's just poking fun at how heavy and ridiculous the situation got over the video. He could be poking fun at how James's video was done too, but I don't think he'd do as a way to outright insult James as a person it's just what Brad does. I'm sure James thought this was funny.
Need to know if the movie is a real thing......
Can't have that in my search history.............
Can't trust the comments.... They could be lying! Like that fellow who told me that my cat was the reincarnation of Mahatma Gandhi....
Ssh, don't interrupt the Great CA Twitter Circle-Jerk while they're taking repetitive pot-shots at the guy.
Except for the fact that he made a video that literally made him a figurehead for blind hatred of an unreleased film, whether that was his intention or not. He created a bubble where dickheads on the internet felt more justified in hating on the film they had not seen because their hero also wasn't seeing it. So, no, he didn't do anything wrong. He did inadvertently encourage others to perpetuate hatred though. Hatred that has been aimed at people like Patton Oswalt, John Squires, Brian Pittman, and many others for simply bothering to say "give the movie a chance". James Rolfe didn't do anything wrong, he just added gasoline to the flames.
I have to say, on some level, I kind of admire what James is doing. He's basically saying, "They did something I don't like with one of my childhood memories, but I'm not going to get mad about it. I'm just going to let it pass and not give it a second thought." There are some other internet critics who I feel could learn something from this. *cough*ERod!*cough*
This deserves all of the applause.
I don't know what's worse. That there is a Dog Fucker movie or that Brad hasn't reviewed it yet.
This has got to be the most un-original, very funny, pile of shit I have ever seen! You sir, have gone too far! Lol! Just kidding. I will say fuck you and this video, but with a lot of laughter behind it because while you were taking a slight at James Rolfe for refusing to review the shitty new Ghostbusters movie, and yes it is shitty just from the trailer alone, it was funny how you went about doing it.
The thing I find funny about the whole refusing to see Ghostbusters saga is that dude talks about it as a beloved franchise! Seriously?The first film is great. The second one a bit meh. And the cartoon series is just one of those perfunctory knock off things that entertained tots and sold a few toys. As a franchise, it's actually nearly as bad as Jaws.
Sure there are too many remakes, but make a stand on something that is actually good and boycott the Exorcist tv series or maybe stop supporting needless franchise movies altogether.
Welp, I fell for it.
Thought this was going to be about "Birth of a Nation".
Oh just admit it:You dont want to see it because there will be a guy sucking that dog dick instead of a gal.You are so homophobic!
I don't think you are showing your best side here, Brad.
People have different opinions, you know. And that's great, as long as you are nice about it. And James Rolfe was.
No need to mock him, especially since so many other people are already doing it.
Sigh... that's the internet, I guess.
Cartoon showing Eli Roth being impaled, and Cinema Snob episodes with jokes about Kung Tai Ted being in a wheelchair, totes lol.
Parody video referencing things like CGI dog dick. Too far bro, too far.
But that's not the point, what has the dog dick got to do with it.
I was talking about this attitude of bashing someone for stating their opinion. Maybe it was all in good fun and I'm overreacting. I don't know.
Damn, Brad actually read my comment and now probably thinks I'm a jerk... I just... I don't know, I liked James Rolfes Video and I think he's a very nice guy, that's all.
Maybe you're overreacting?
Commenting when emotional is about as clever as driving while drunk.
Well... maybe less dangerous.
I'm not watching Brad's video because I know it will just ruin James' video.
I'm sad because I know, one day, people will ask me what my favorite "Refuse to..." video is, and I'll have to specify that it's JAMES ROLFE'S "Refuse to..." video, and not Brad Jones'.
I don't like that Brad has made a video ruining one of my favorite other videos.
Finding it really funny that Rolfe fans are triggered by Brad making fun of him. You'd think that AVGN fans would have thicker skin when it comes to making fun of people.
Bradley, how would you feel if someone refused to see your Cinema Snob movie solely based on its trailer?
Why, then they would never find out it's one of the worst mistakes every committed to the medium of film. It's so boring, its only use is to put small infants and the elderly to sleep.
But beyond that, can't wait for the remake of the Cinema Snob movie where Jake's role is replaced by Dave. Jillian is replaced by Rayn, er, Violet, er, that new chick. And Spoony is replaced by 2008 Spoony.
There were plenty of people who didn't want to see the movie based on the trailer. I lost zero sleep over it. Sorry =)
So you are allowed to decide to watch a movie based on the trailer, but you aren't allowed to decide not to watch a movie based on a trailer? So, if I am hearing you right, if you see a trailer you must see a movie.
No, no, no. I'm saying you can't make an Internet video announcing that you aren't going to watch the movie. If you want to talk about the movie at all, you must watch it. Talking about behind the scenes stuff or production difficulties shouldn't be allowed.
If you do talk about a movie without watching it, a bunch of lunatics will take it personally and being insulting you, your business, your family, your friends, your country, and what they believe is your political orientation.
So, don't not watch the movie and then talk about it. Only talk about the movie if you do watch it and agree with everyone else who thinks it's fantastic.
They could have made it a direct sequel. They just needed Linda Lovelace and a shovel...
No way Brad-ski.....
I call major BS.... you know damn well you'd see it if they got Tequila to star! :)
Honestly, I didn't even realize that this was satire (nor the responses to the Cinemassacre video - even one by Patton Oswalt) until the day after I watched this.
For me, I think if the reviews (on RT but also whoever sees it on Midnight Screenings) are good enough, I'd see Ghostbusters, but I'm not exactly interested nor de-interested.
You don't get it man. It's very important who sees Ghostbusters and why. This stuff matters.
I listen to Canadian radio from bumfuck Canada, and the "DJ" was talking about the reaction to James' video. LOL WOW this thing blew up to the point of ridiculousness.
So much drama over what looks like a entirely forgettable movie. Can everyone step back and get a grip? Even this video feels unwarranted. Hell this post feels unwarranted. Take one mediocre movie remake by all outward appearances has no reason to exist and gender swap the cast and everyone just loses their mind proclaiming it to be either the worst thing ever or the bravest most ground breaking thing ever. When the only thing seemingly remarkable about the film by all outward appearances is how hyperbolic people are reacting to its existense.
Get out of here with your rational and reasonable assessment. There's no place for that on the internet, buddy.
Glad you've seen the film and can inform us all how good or bad it was two months before its release. If I had abilities like that, I probably wouldn't have died so painfully.
Jesus, I think you need to get off the cross, being up there for so long seems to have made you so exhausted you forgotten what the terms " looks like", " by all outward appearances" and "seemingly" mean
Yes, tell me what to do. I haven't done enough for you already, let me jump through some hoops for you. Or maybe I could say "by all outward appearances" you seem way too preoccupied with gender and "seemingly" are incapable of trying something out. Enjoy being vanilla, my son.
Jesus, I don't recall telling you or anyone else to do a thing aside from consider taking step back and stop with all the over hyperbolic rhetoric over what appears to be another forgettable and disposable mediocre remake. But whatever keep tilting at those windmills you're not even talking to me or anyone else at this point so vent away I'm sure that will accomplish a lot. Want to call Brad Jones a sexist bastard while you're at it to because he like me thought the trailers looked like mediocre dreck too?
Just heard about a bunch of rat-fucking trolls going after poor Patton w/ dead wife jokes....
A message from my overly-empathic humanist DFH bleeding heart:
I. hope. they. die. in. a. fire.
Learn How to Troubleshoot QuickBooks Update Error 15106.
Just Visit Us: https://qbsenterprisesupport.com/quickbooks-payroll-update-error-15106/ to get better insights.
Quickbooks may sometimes woefully attract certain errors in its banking section. For instance <a href="https://www.qbssolved.com/how-to-fix-the-banking-error-code-105/">Quickbooks banking error 105<a>. Quickbooks banking error 105 happens due to the bank's website downtime. If the Quickbooks error 105 is still persistent, call QBSsolved at 1-888-910-1619
Thanks for your post. Such a nice information shared by you. My name Jack Hum from Dallas USA and I am working as a error resolve specialist for QuickBooks like as following below.
Non-review/convention miscellaneous Vlogs of randomness.