I'd be more than happy for the Ghostbusters third film to be an all-female cast. It isn't disrespectful to the source material, because, contrary to internet peoples beliefs, women aren't trying to take over the world with feminism. Having a female cast will mean one thing. There will be lots of women in the film. Frankly, the level of understanding of what feminism is from internet men who get their knickers in a twist because of women screams of two things; immaturity and fear.
It's a hypothetical question, it's not saying the original ghost busters were crap because they were men. It's not saying women do it better. It's saying "This would be a film about four guys in their mid to late 70s fighting ghosts. Why don't we do it with the younger generation?" The fact that it is four women is immaterial. There'd be no argument if it was four dudes because the original Ghostbusters was four dudes and it doesn't challenge a very small, narrow and frankly, wrong world view.
It isn't disrespectful, and if you understood what feminism is then you wouldn't think having four women dress up and fire proton beams at ghosts is feminism trying to take over your little geek island.
It would be fun, cool, and probably more than a little bit fatal for the franchise as most people would be majorly butthurt over it all.
So, it gets my vote, just because it pisses off internet morons.
I wonder if someone might be able to - change her hair colour to Black, and get rid of the white stripe down the left hand side of her face, but leave the white stripe that runs down the right hand side of her hair.
I am also wondering if it might have a similar, or cooler, effect if her hair was totally white, but the white stripe that runs down the right hand side of her face, was black
I think the art is amazing, although I tend to appreciate comicbooks as a medium instead of decry everything reflexively.
Thank you. Reading the most of the responses to this artist made me want to punch my computer screen. I would imagine that the artist isn't, in fact, four years old and is employed by a major publisher, which is more than can be said for the person posting that response, who, I would imagine, is a master of burning McDonalds Patties, or simply, a master of being an arse.
Just gonna throw this out there - people are talking about "shit art" because it's not something, they personally, like. That's fair enough. You're allowed an opinion.
But those same people have to remember that other people will enjoy the art and will like it. Further more, the people are Marvel like it, and they're better at giving artists good opportunities than angry fanboys are. Mike Mignola got his first professional break in comics Inking Keith Giffen on Defenders. His work was so bad that after his first issue they told him to shape up, or he'd be out of the industry forever. So, Mike did, and here he is now, a professional with two films under his belt, a TV show and various other credits.
The point I am trying to make is A) your opinion is just that, your opinion. It is not law, it does not mean you can call someone else shit because you don't like it. Someone may say the same thing of what you do in your job and I would imagine that'd probably annoy or upset you, but you'll have some machismo fueled comeback like "I don't even care what people think of me at work. I hate it anyway." and B) what an artist starts off with isn't necessarily what he finishes with. Chris Bachalo is a good indication of this, his style has changed so much since his first pinup piece for Sandman.
So, I guess I'm saying if you don't like it, don't buy it. If someone spent their entire life on the internet criticizing what you're doing, it'd probably irritating you to no end and you'd label them a troll. If you're going post to post, saying something is shit because you're in disagreement with it, you're a troll.