Female Ghostbusters earns 77 cents on the dollar as their male counterparts

wnose · 2016-10-12T09:49:59+00:00

Yeah, all us men got together and had a meeting and decided to hate the new Ghostbusters, OR the movie just fucking sucked, you decide what is more believable.

Shitpost4lyfes · 2016-10-12T09:14:19+00:00

That's not fair at all...

It wasn't even close to 77% as good

trolliloquy · 2016-10-12T14:30:58+00:00

Ronda Rousey said it best in an interview she did a while ago. The reporter said to her "do you think women should be paid the same as men" or something stupid like that. Her response was "you should be paid depending on how much you bring in, if you bring in a lot you should be paid regardless of sex. If you don't bring in much money then don't expect a huge salary" and that's basically hit the nail on the head.

If you're of a great global interest then male or female - you're going to get paid.

EDIT: Found the video I was talking about https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5xRHz8Su6E

ghastlyactions · 2016-10-12T12:57:36+00:00

Way less actually, adjusted for inflation and the much much higher budget of the new film. Like 3 cents on the dollar or something if I remember right. I forget the exact math.

zefcfd · 2016-10-12T14:49:26+00:00

lol 2016 budget: 140 million, 1984 budget: 30 million

Osoto_Gari · 2016-10-12T09:32:05+00:00

Don't talk about inflation adjusted figures ;-)

iolex · 2016-10-12T13:18:14+00:00

Still would have been 76 cents more than that pile of garbage deserved

2016-10-12T09:56:53+00:00

Another proof that the "wage gap" is due to the amount-quality of work produced, and not its nominal value. As in: they might both be titled ghostbusters, but only one is good.

eyemadeanaccount · 2016-10-12T15:38:48+00:00

What's worse is that's not even adjusted for inflation

A 1985 re-release raised the film's United States gross to $238.6 million ($525 million in today's dollars)

So $525,000,000 vs $227,400,000
227,400,000 / 525,000,000 = $0.43 cents on the dollar. It's even worse! Not even half as good.

2016-10-12T14:30:41+00:00

ha, considering it is even less than that with inflation. It was a horrible decision to make the movie. They got what they deserved.

Actionjack7 · 2016-10-12T17:35:41+00:00

That's pretty fair considering they were only 40% as funny

oHistoric · 2016-10-12T16:20:30+00:00

If I wanted to see some girls sucking shit up I'll go on pornhub, thanks.

giantdong69 · 2016-10-12T20:02:50+00:00

Totally didn't account for inflation.

295.2 million USD in 1984 would actually be worth 684.3 million USD today.

So they were actually making 33 cents on the dollar.

lessyes · 2016-10-12T20:05:03+00:00

Did you adjust for inflation?

Makaronas21 · 2016-10-12T15:43:51+00:00

holy hell 144mill USD for what?

1984 ghostbusters had better vfx than new one

the_good_things · 2016-10-12T15:00:00+00:00

Except, accounting for inflation the $295M made by Ghostbusters in 1984 would be around the $678M mark in 2016. Or conversely, the $227M in 2016 would be worth only ~$98M. So in 2016 the original Ghostbusters would have out earned the reboot by 230% meaning that the reboot only earned 43.5% of what the original made. And again, conversely, in 1984 the original out earned the reboot by a whopping 301%, meaning that the reboot only earned ~33.2% of what the original made. No where close to 77 percent in either decade.

Edit: not to mention production costs and actual net profits from both movies accounting for inflation.

bruisedunderpenis · 2016-10-12T15:47:19+00:00

Except movie tickets cost 4 times as much today as they did in '84, the '84 movies budget was about 1/4 of the budget for the reboot, and that number they used is not adjusted for inflation. The reboot profited nowhere near 77 cents on the dollar compared to the original.

Pandemojo · 2016-10-12T15:50:46+00:00

I'm somewhat surprised it even made money. Despite inflation, seeing the original made almost ten times it's budget does put it in a better perspective.

lugosky · 2016-10-12T16:22:03+00:00

It's more like (227.7-144)/(295.2-30)=0.32, which accurately describes the quality of this movie.

2016-10-12T16:25:16+00:00

Haha that makes for a way more catchy title but the actual earnings are 295-30 million = 265m for the original Ghostbusters and 228 - 144 million = 84m for the new piece of trash.

So the actual ratio (not even accounting for inflation or purchasing power) is 84/265 = 31% which is still more than it deserved.

UniqueCoverings · 2016-10-12T16:31:42+00:00

There is a deference in 1980's 200m and today's 200m, So the gap would be larger. Also..

The women OLNY made that much because the men laid the ground work of a quality film series.

And they did not live up..

TheMaverick13 · 2016-10-12T16:34:00+00:00

Well as the films budget shows they were probably paid more. I don't really care enough to actually look up how much they were individually paid.

onepunchman20 · 2016-10-12T16:50:21+00:00

I still haven't seen the new movie. The only reason I did not see it was because of the crap cast, it had nothing to do with them being female. I just do not find any of the four women they choose to be very good actors, with the exception of Melisa McCarthy, even then she does not fit into a sci-fi genre role. I know they were trying to make it funny, but that was the issue they tried to MAKE it funny. The other Ghostbuster films did not have to try to force the laughs, they just seemed natural.

2016-10-12T17:25:31+00:00

It cost them 4.5 times as much to make the movie. 83.7 / 265.2 = 31.56 So that's actually 31.56 cents for every 1.00.

The return on the first GB movie was 9.84 to 1. The one with women only got 1.58 to 1.

Juicyjake23 · 2016-10-12T20:39:03+00:00

Is this inflation adjusted?

RagingRedHerpes · 2016-10-12T21:56:03+00:00

In order to find out what they were paid legitimately, you'd have to base the fucking numbers on the budget, not the box office gross. People literally just try to find anything to bitch about.

DanksForTheMemories · 2016-10-13T01:46:49+00:00

I will never not upvote this.

CaptainRandus · 2016-10-13T02:39:23+00:00

Does this account for inflation?

Or does it rely on the fact that it's assuming that 77% as many people gave enough of a shit to watch it?

chambertlo · 2016-10-13T04:35:29+00:00

Ha.

Haha.

RobDog21 · 2016-10-13T07:12:18+00:00

This should be a on r/facepalm

toastfacegrilla · 2016-10-13T09:08:56+00:00

Just wait until they adjust it for inflation!

2016-10-14T15:45:03+00:00

that profit margin tho..

weigookin · 2016-10-18T10:03:35+00:00

You are over estimating. . . Don't forget to factor 30+ years of inflation

Juankii · 2016-10-28T23:59:02+00:00

Well the 1984 did 500 times better with a smaller budget they broke even and made a little they don't even count the income until the movie breaks even so that number minus the budget is the actual money it made

Finkk · 2016-10-12T14:52:47+00:00

Who's attempting to invoke the pass here?

Almitywity · 2016-10-12T12:00:40+00:00

Is this adjusted for inflation?

pussyjuicelover · 2016-10-12T09:14:19+00:00

chup kar phudi kay nai to abdul ko shikayat laga doonga

Female Ghostbusters earns 77 cents on the dollar as their male counterparts

Comments

JESAUIS

Title	Female Ghostbusters earns 77 cents on the dollar as their male counterparts
Author	xXBreezy
Upvotes	1137
Comments	102
Date	October 12, 2016 8:48 AM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PussyPassDenied
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/pussypassdenied/comments/57359h/female_ghostbusters_earns_77_cents_on_the_dollar/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PussyPassDenied/female-ghostbusters-earns-77-cents-on-the-dollar.939966 https://theredarchive.com/post/939966