Ghostbusters 3 - Part 2

[TheComicbookKid]

Part of the charm of the Ghostbusters was that it was a more organic, artist-generated concept. The story was lovingly crafted by Dan and Harold, and they intended to bring their friend Belushi on board, and when that became impossible they brought in their mercurial colleague Bill Murray. Throughout the whole movie, there is a sense of integrity and ownership of the film between the actors and the parts they play.

A GB reboot, regardless of whether it stars men, women or CGI transforming robots, will be missing that essential heart and charm.

Maybe. Or maybe it's the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull situation where no matter how many of the same people you put on the project, the actors/writers/directors and even the audience have changed.

And sometimes it's a Planet of the Apes situation where the old movie is classic. So just tell a different kind of story with none of the same characters vs the Burton style reimagining that simply tries to do the same tricks in a shiny new package and ends up terrible.

There will never be another Stay Puft sequence. Don't even try it.

 

[sueb1863]

Galactica 1980 was the pinnacle of human achievement.

Yeah, that was a big mistake - except for the episode with Starbuck in it. That one was pretty decent.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

I hope they subtly acknowledge the difference in time periods with the art direction.

Like having the proton packs not as large and clunky. plus the wands should be wireless.

I hope the don't use the exact same Ecto-1. Maybe give them an old van. People think it's a food truck or something else. lol

Maybe the jumpsuits would be dark blue in this version.

i always thought this looked cool.

though they're probably going to have to make them smaller if you have the likes of wiig getting cast. I'm 6'1 210 pounds and even the original looks heavy as **** to me.

 

[JangoNate]

Maybe. Or maybe it's the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull situation where no matter how many of the same people you put on the project, the actors/writers/directors and even the audience have changed.

And sometimes it's a Planet of the Apes situation where the old movie is classic. So just tell a different kind of story with none of the same characters vs the Burton style reimagining that simply tries to do the same tricks in a shiny new package and ends up terrible.

There will never be another Stay Puft sequence. Don't even try it.

I think this is a big and important point. This new movie will never be the same as the first Ghostbusters because I'm not the same 3yr old boy pushing a squeaky Ecto 1 through the living room floor on Christmas morning. Back in the day I couldn't understand why the movie wasn't exactly like the Real Ghostbusters cartoon I thought it was based on. Now I'm over 30 and, though I'm not overly critical like some of us fans, I'm going to view it differently and get the jokes the 3 yr old me never got. I still remember when I went up to my mom and asked if she was menstruating. When she said, "What?!" in horror and confusion i calmly replied, "Back off man! I'm a scientist!"

Comedy's are different nowadays, for better or worse. The general audience expects different things from their movies nowadays, for better or worse. And so to make a successful Ghostbuster movie in 2016 it means ignoring most of the rants we upset few will write plenty of between now and then and make the movie that a.) they want to make (that they'll pour their heart into!) and b.) that will appeal to the broader public needed for the movie to be successful.

I've been following GB3 since 99 pretty hardcore. We've heard a lot about actors, directors, and script writers. There is something I heard in the EW article that has convinced me this movie is going to happen. Feig said the reason we haven't gotten a movie is because nobody wanted to do it. Even he said no at first. Sony wants this and now Feig and his writer want it. Strap in friends.

 

[DyeLorean]

This is a ver tricky property to update: is not based on anything, a lot of the success was lightning in a bottle (the actors, the mix of comedy/sci fi) and is heavily cemented in the 80's which is, to me, something that can't be replicated, no matter how much you try, you just can't.
Say something like the Total Recall film. It was in the future, you can change that, you can update the idea -as they did-. Ghostbusters is much more complicated than that. In a lot of ways is very old school, and I doubt they're gonna take that approach. In fact, I suspect they're going to use a lot of CGI... and the truth is, you can't win with the fans of that film. Nothing will top the original. They can try, but why bother? Is there an audience? Is somebody other than Dan Aykroyd requesting this movie to be made?
I think is part of a larger debate about why trying to revisit as much old stuff as possible.

 

[jmc]

I think this is a big and important point. This new movie will never be the same as the first Ghostbusters because I'm not the same 3yr old boy pushing a squeaky Ecto 1 through the living room floor on Christmas morning. Back in the day I couldn't understand why the movie wasn't exactly like the Real Ghostbusters cartoon I thought it was based on. Now I'm over 30 and, though I'm not overly critical like some of us fans, I'm going to view it differently and get the jokes the 3 yr old me never got. I still remember when I went up to my mom and asked if she was menstruating. When she said, "What?!" in horror and confusion i calmly replied, "Back off man! I'm a scientist!"

Comedy's are different nowadays, for better or worse. The general audience expects different things from their movies nowadays, for better or worse. And so to make a successful Ghostbuster movie in 2016 it means ignoring most of the rants we upset few will write plenty of between now and then and make the movie that a.) they want to make (that they'll pour their heart into!) and b.) that will appeal to the broader public needed for the movie to be successful.

I've been following GB3 since 99 pretty hardcore. We've heard a lot about actors, directors, and script writers. There is something I heard in the EW article that has convinced me this movie is going to happen. Feig said the reason we haven't gotten a movie is because nobody wanted to do it. Even he said no at first. Sony wants this and now Feig and his writer want it. Strap in friends.

This brings up the question then if the audience is now different what's the value in using the Ghostbusters name at all in the first place? If we're having to deal with a new audience wouldn't it be best to create something that is for this new audience? Ghostbusters is a product of its time with actors that will forever be linked to its characters, so the question is why not leave it be and make some all-female cast ghost comedy franchise a product of today? To be honest all slapping the Ghostbusters name onto the idea does is creates division and heaps unfair criticism towards a project before it's released, if this were a Ghostbusters-like idea you can bet your house on it there would be nowhere near the level of outcry currently being seen, if anything more people would be willing to give the project a chance, as of now people are already dismissing the concept based on it more or less just using the Ghostbusters name.

 

[JangoNate]

This brings up the question then if the audience is now different what's the value in using the Ghostbusters name at all in the first place? If we're having to deal with a new audience wouldn't it be best to create something that is for this new audience? Ghostbusters is a product of its time with actors that will forever be linked to its characters, so the question is why not leave it be and make some all-female cast ghost comedy franchise a product of today? To be honest all slapping the Ghostbusters name onto the idea does is creates division and heaps unfair criticism towards a project before it's released, if this were a Ghostbusters-like idea you can bet your house on it there would be nowhere near the level of outcry currently being seen, if anything more people would be willing to give the project a chance, as of now people are already dismissing the concept based on it more or less just using the Ghostbusters name.

I'm sure from a studio point of view that it's all about brand recognition. There are kids today who know about Ghostbusters but aren't attached to the original films. I meet them every year during our Halloween celebration when I do a ghost safety training course before everyone trick or treats. Slap that logo on a product and already it's going to get infinite attention. And no matter how bad things sound on boards like this one, there is such a thing as a Ghostbusters fan that isn't outraged by a new film or reboot. Again, slap on the logo and it's going to make a lot more money than Ghoulpunchers from earlier.

Nobody is forced to like what they're doing, but it still makes sense. A film makes money, but franchises make tons of money. "The franchise rights alone will make us rich beyond our wildest dreams."

 

[jmc]

I'm sure from a studio point of view that it's all about brand recognition. There are kids today who know about Ghostbusters but aren't attached to the original films. I meet them every year during our Halloween celebration when I do a ghost safety training course before everyone trick or treats. Slap that logo on a product and already it's going to get infinite attention. And no matter how bad things sound on boards like this one, there is such a thing as a Ghostbusters fan that isn't outraged by a new film or reboot. Again, slap on the logo and it's going to make a lot more money than Ghoulpunchers from earlier.

Nobody is forced to like what they're doing, but it still makes sense. A film makes money, but franchises make tons of money. "The franchise rights alone will make us rich beyond our wildest dreams."

The thing is though as the likes of Total Recall and Robocop have shown reaching into film franchises past their use by date doesn't automatically equal success. I understand the logic in using branding from past films, but it's also a flawed logic because you're not actually making anything for today's audiences, you said it yourself they aren't attached to the name, as such the paradox is you're unknowingly relying on audiences of 20-30 years ago who grew up with the likes of Ghostbusters to make this film a success. If you're removing the aspects of Ghostbusters that those people know all you're left with is a hollow movie that's trying to be something it isn't. So the question then becomes why not just make a new ghost comedy franchise for today that can appeal to everyone? All it requires is a little more work.

 

[JangoNate]

The thing is though as the likes of Total Recall and Robocop have shown reaching into film franchises past their use by date doesn't automatically equal success. I understand the logic in using branding from past films, but it's also a flawed logic because you're not actually making anything for today's audiences, you said it yourself they aren't attached to the name, as such the paradox is you're unknowingly relying on audiences of 20-30 years ago who grew up with the likes of Ghostbusters to make this film a success. If you're removing the aspects of Ghostbusters that those people know all you're left with is a hollow movie that's trying to be something it isn't. So the question then becomes why not just make a new ghost comedy franchise for today that can appeal to everyone? All it requires is a little more work.

Definitely doesn't mean success, but it doesn't hurt. It's up to the filmmakers and cast to put a quality product up. The logo is just for a boost. I also don't think Total Recall or Robocop are fair comparisons. Neither of those films have the fandom that Ghostbusters has. And I'm sorry, there are a lot of people out there that with the initial news are saying "I'm not going to see this pile of doo foo!" But give it time to see if this gets made, what the first trailer looks like and we get a fuller vision of what the director wants and we'll see if that changes. It's Ghostbusters! Some of us are going to see it good, bad, and ugly to support the franchise and some of us will see it just to confirm it's the train wreck we always new it would be.

All in all, it doesn't matter. If it happens I can't not see it. I've been waiting for this since I walked out to GB2 in '89. I just hope it's good.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

I still remember when I went up to my mom and asked if she was menstruating. When she said, "What?!" in horror and confusion i calmly replied, "Back off man! I'm a scientist!"

LOL!!

Comedy's are different nowadays, for better or worse. The general audience expects different things from their movies nowadays, for better or worse. And so to make a successful Ghostbuster movie in 2016 it means ignoring most of the rants we upset few will write plenty of between now and then and make the movie that a.) they want to make (that they'll pour their heart into!) and b.) that will appeal to the broader public needed for the movie to be successful.

I mean, assuming this gets pass the script stage, this is what worries me. I don't think I've seen a movie since GB actually able to do ghost in a funny way that wasn't a straight out comedy ala Scary movie.

Ghost movies today are actually scary, but the heart of Ghostbuster lies in the comedy of these 4 people doing there thing. Shaun of the Dead is the only movie I've seen to actually make scary zombies and action-comedy but it's that dry British humor.

The Planet of the Apes franchise is the best example of updating while telling a completely different story. Burton's Planet tried to simply "ape" the original just with better effects and a repeat shock ending. Don't do that.

 

[Hulk1968]

Not a fan of the whole reboot idea. The female cast I can get on board with; everything else, (like ignoring the first 2 films) not so much. You should read the threads on gbfans. Wow.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

i'm really hoping it isn't a reboot. they can make gb3 without most of the original members before they revisit that with murray down the line. though, i really wish ernie hadn't had said anything about the topic. now the chances he gets included seem slim to none.

 

[LostSon88]

When a GB3 script was officially being worked on by The Office writers, I had a strong interest that slowly faded with each new story but with the most recent (and confirmed news) there's officially nothing about this i'm looking forward too.

All female team?
Reboot?
The feeling that this'll end up being a full-on COMEDY.

I'm out.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Is this thing possibly being head lined by an all female cast really riling people up?

 

[Gr0oT]

More like the BallBusters amirite?

 

[Nardz937]

Emma Stone is a lock, right?

Don't know about who else.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

Weren't they talking like Wiig would more or less play a role like Murrays?

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

Is this thing possibly being head lined by an all female cast really riling people up?

No, it's the stupid "rebooting" we're whining about.

 

[sueb1863]

The thing is though as the likes of Total Recall and Robocop have shown reaching into film franchises past their use by date doesn't automatically equal success. I understand the logic in using branding from past films, but it's also a flawed logic because you're not actually making anything for today's audiences, you said it yourself they aren't attached to the name, as such the paradox is you're unknowingly relying on audiences of 20-30 years ago who grew up with the likes of Ghostbusters to make this film a success. If you're removing the aspects of Ghostbusters that those people know all you're left with is a hollow movie that's trying to be something it isn't. So the question then becomes why not just make a new ghost comedy franchise for today that can appeal to everyone? All it requires is a little more work.

Exactly! There is nothing connecting this movie to Ghostbusters beyond the very basic concept that it's a comedy about people who hunt ghosts. That's IT. So why tie it to the Ghostbusters name, other than a blatant attempt to cash in on brand recognition?

it's not like the modern day paranormal scene, with all the ghost reality shows and ghost hunts and ghost books, isn't ripe for its own parody. You don't NEED to go back to 1984 for inspiration - just turn on 'Ghost Adventures'.

 

[JangoNate]

Exactly! There is nothing connecting this movie to Ghostbusters beyond the very basic concept that it's a comedy about people who hunt ghosts. That's IT. So why tie it to the Ghostbusters name, other than a blatant attempt to cash in on brand recognition?

it's not like the modern day paranormal scene, with all the ghost reality shows and ghost hunts and ghost books, isn't ripe for its own parody. You don't NEED to go back to 1984 for inspiration - just turn on 'Ghost Adventures'.

Ghost Adventures does a good job parodying itself most times. I used to watch it for a good laugh now and then. It wouldn't surprise me if the main guy finished every episode with "And now for GTL (gym, tan, laundry).

 

[Goshdarn Batman]

Ghost Adventures...I think I have watched it on tv sometimes. That's the show where everything that happens is caused by ghosts, right?

Ghost adventurer: "If you listen closely, you can hear the wailing of restless spirits...and do you smell that? It's...sulfur!"

Soundman: "Actually, that was me. Black bean burritos, sorry!"

 

[JangoNate]

Yeah, they do some silly EVP work. They also where tight shirts and act like they're in the mafia. Their goal is to agitate ghosts. Pretty ridiculous.

 

[sueb1863]

It's also the show where they jump and yell at every single creak and groan, and ask each other, "What the hell was THAT?" over and over and over. They act as if they've never heard an old building creak before.

Ghost Hunters is somewhat better, although it hasn't been as interesting since they were caught faking evidence a while back. Most of the times nothing happens, but at least they don't act freaked out all the time.

But they could easily make a comedy movie based on that sort of thing and just leave Ghostbusters out of it completely.

 

[Vaibow]

I think this is a big and important point. This new movie will never be the same as the first Ghostbusters because I'm not the same 3yr old boy pushing a squeaky Ecto 1 through the living room floor on Christmas morning. Back in the day I couldn't understand why the movie wasn't exactly like the Real Ghostbusters cartoon I thought it was based on. Now I'm over 30 and, though I'm not overly critical like some of us fans, I'm going to view it differently and get the jokes the 3 yr old me never got. I still remember when I went up to my mom and asked if she was menstruating. When she said, "What?!" in horror and confusion i calmly replied, "Back off man! I'm a scientist!"

Comedy's are different nowadays, for better or worse. The general audience expects different things from their movies nowadays, for better or worse. And so to make a successful Ghostbuster movie in 2016 it means ignoring most of the rants we upset few will write plenty of between now and then and make the movie that a.) they want to make (that they'll pour their heart into!) and b.) that will appeal to the broader public needed for the movie to be successful.

I've been following GB3 since 99 pretty hardcore. We've heard a lot about actors, directors, and script writers. There is something I heard in the EW article that has convinced me this movie is going to happen. Feig said the reason we haven't gotten a movie is because nobody wanted to do it. Even he said no at first. Sony wants this and now Feig and his writer want it. Strap in friends.

Best. Reply. Ever

 

[Donut]

Projects like these is probably why one of the many reasons Sony is having money trouble