This was posted 7 years 8 months 29 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Free Movie Ghost Team on Google Play

2140
Free Movie Ghost Team on Google Play
Go to Deal
phroghollow on 21/07/2016 - 09:02 play.google.com (3737 clicks)
Last edited 21/07/2016 - 09:11 by 1 other user

It's pretty simple, Google Play Movies is offering a free movie: Ghost Team starring Jon Heder, David Krumholtz and Justin Long.

Click the link and add it to your movie library. The movie says it's in HD when you click the Add to Library button.

IMDB Description:
A paranormal-obsessed man mounts his own investigation into the beyond with his depressed best friend, misfit nephew, a cable access medium and an overeager security guard.

No rating yet on Rotten Tomatoes - though 91% rate it as wanting to see.

Via: Ausdroid

Mod: Please link directly to the product.

Entertainment Ghost Team Movie

Related Stores

Google Play
Google Play
Marketplace

closed Comments

  • rocklinsuv on 21/07/2016 - 09:10
    +1

    Is is just me thinking this is a knockoff Ghostbuster?

    • phroghollow on 21/07/2016 - 09:15
      +3

      Did you watch the trailer? Nowhere near Ghostbusters. I do agree that it's very likely a cash-in on the Ghostbusters marketing machine, but it has three fairly well known stars.

      • rocklinsuv on 21/07/2016 - 09:26

        Watched. I agree with u, not even close ;)

    • PainToad on 21/07/2016 - 09:29
      +4

      Is is just me thinking this is a knockoff Ghostbuster?

      Can't be worse than the real new Ghosybusters.

      • payton on 21/07/2016 - 09:34
        +4

        a movie with four female lead, and the funniest person was the ditzy male supporting character.

        • iridiumstem on 21/07/2016 - 09:38
          +2

          You are so anti-feminism (this was a jab at people claiming that the critics are anti-feminist for criticising the movie).

        • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2016 - 09:59
          +2

          The main problem with the new Ghostbusters is the director and his style of directing.

          • Flat shots, no creativity with the camera, no dynamic transitions, useless at reveals, can't build tension to save his life, hands off to the CGI department for CGI shots etc.
          • Every scene is improv heavy. Which gets you some fun gags but means your plot and character is out the window. Characters and plots are poorly set up and any pay offs don't really make sense.

          The actors were all pretty good. Their improv was decent. The movie as a whole lacked direction which means the characters lacked impact and the plot didn't work.

        • PinzVidz on 21/07/2016 - 10:29
          +4

          @tantryl:

          Thank you David (or Margaret). :)

        • PonyTable on 21/07/2016 - 10:39
          +1

          @Oversimplified: Can confirm, comment is definitely oversimplified.

        • iridiumstem on 21/07/2016 - 10:40
          +1

          @PonyTable: Agreed. ;)

        • PainToad on 21/07/2016 - 11:46
          +10

          @Oversimplified:

          Wonder how the feminist would react to Charlies Angels being remade with an all male cast.

          It has nothing to do with sexism, it's the complete pissing over the core/legacy of a cult favorite.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2016 - 14:29
          +1

          @PinzVidz: No worries. This stuff matters in comedy. It's why Edgar Wright is so damn good - he treats comedies like real movies with the cinematography, character and plot-wise, even though the world they're in is absurd.

        • PinzVidz on 21/07/2016 - 19:28

          @tantryl:

          Edgar Wright? Now you're talking!

        • BadGiraffe on 25/07/2016 - 13:17
          +1

          @PainToad: Angel's Charlies. I'd watch that.

        • [Deactivated] on 27/07/2016 - 08:50
          +1

          @PainToad:

          it's the complete pissing over the core/legacy of a cult favorite.

          tldr; With Ghostbusters the original didn't make a big deal out of them being men. They just were. Entirely new character of a different gender makes no difference to the plot. So it's irrelevant. Charlie's Angels premise and title is tied to the idea of sexy women doing detective stuff. Your own suggestion requires changing the title/premise.

          Longform:

          That's just generally a problem with movies based on big name IP, nothing to do with flopping the gender of the cast. Would Robocop Mark II have been any worse if Joel Kinnamon and Abbie Cornish switched roles? I doubt it. It would still just be a mediocre movie trading on the name of the original for it's limited financial success. Was the problem with Total Recall Mark II that Kate Beckinsale played both the Sharon Stone and Michael Ironside part? No, it was just a bad movie.

          Hell, flopping the gender of the cast in Ghostbusters is a good thing in that situation because at least it separates it from the original. They didn't recast the original characters, they're not messing with that universe and making your brain conflate two very different Venkmen. It would have been even better if they hadn't had original cast cameos (playing different characters) but that's a separate issue tied with the general crappiness of using brand name IP.

          Flopping the gender of the Ghostbusters doesn't impact the plot. No-one ever described the original movie as "Three/Four Men Who Bust Ghosts". But Charlie's Angels entire premise and the title of the show/movie was centered around the main characters being female. That was an essential part of the premise. That's what people watched it to see. No-one said they saw the original Ghostbusters because the premise was men and only men busting ghosts.

          It's like when news of an Iron Fist show started coming out and they were talking about casting an asian dude. That made no sense - the point of Iron Fist is a fish out of water white guy in a Chinese superpower setting. That was the premise of the character - hey look at the white guy being all asiany. You could say similar things about Jessica Jones being a woman and Luke Cage being black. They were given those attributes to make a specific character/plot point.

          Now Daredevil… you could switch his gender and it wouldn't really make a difference. You could switch his sexuality and it wouldn't really make a difference. You could change his skin colour and it wouldn't really make a difference. Hell, they cast a fairly slim 5'10" guy as Daredevil when he's an incredibly muscular 6' character. Wolverine is a 5'3" manlet and they cast a guy a foot taller. That worked just fine. And this is true of most white male characters simply because they're the default template. Nothing is usually made of it, it's not pointed out, and it rarely has anything to do with their character (exception exist like Iron Fist).

          Blah blah blah you get the point.

  • fritzsticker on 21/07/2016 - 10:05
    +1

    Ta op

  • Iggemo on 21/07/2016 - 10:18

    Can i add this to anything other than a phone? Like, i want to watch this on my PC or Xbone or something, not a phone, how would i do that?

    • Iggemo on 21/07/2016 - 10:20

      oh nvm it is easy to watch on desktop, thanks Iggemo!

  • coxymla on 21/07/2016 - 10:20
    +1

    Whom are you going to dial?

    • moo on 21/07/2016 - 10:44
      +6

      jv.

      • coprocessor8087 on 21/07/2016 - 12:19
        +2

        sorry I am currently busy with Ozbargain. Please leave your name and number after the beep.

    • zzymurgy on 21/07/2016 - 11:02
      +1

      Napoleon Dynamite, apparently.

  • Lucky13 on 21/07/2016 - 20:32

    Thanks!

  • ToobsAU on 22/07/2016 - 01:23
    +5

    Google Play exclusive, how ironic… I really hope they paid Google to do this because I enjoyed it about as much as I enjoy watching 30 second unskippable YouTube ads on sub 30s videos.

    • Wystri Warrick on 24/07/2016 - 21:29

      Lol that made me laugh. hate those ads.

  • [Deactivated] on 25/07/2016 - 13:09

    Anyone know if I can download this to my netbook, to watch off-line?

  • Name on 26/07/2016 - 20:22

    Wow that was a terrible movie. I understand why it was free.

  • g12345567 on 26/07/2016 - 20:57

    Free is free. Can't complain there. Even if the movie is not that good.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join