Ghostbusters 3 - Part 3

[Lando81]

I seriously can not believe they're moving forward with this movie. The entire concept sounds absolutely abysmal.

We don't know the entire concept. Just "Female Ghostbusters" Someone sounds kinda sexist...

 

[PyroChamber]

Even though it's sort of like the original in concept, they seem to be distancing this movie away from everything involving the original franchise. If this is the case, then why even call it Ghostbusters?

I'm sure they could have called this movie something else.

 

[The Guard]

I can't believe we're still having this discussion.

Because the concept of Ghostbusters has merit, period.

If it was called something else, it would just be deemed a Ghostbusters ripoff.

 

[Iron_Stark]

Isn't this pretty much a Ghostbusters ripoff?

 

[JangoNate]

Isn't this pretty much a Ghostbusters ripoff?

Depends on the finished product. Handle the property with a bit of reverence and respect (which can be done with a reboot and with lady GBs) for the Ghostbusting world and my answer is no. If it ends up being a deeply shallow movie of shotgun toting girls in bikinis killing ghosts with ghost bullets, but, hey, they used the GB theme... yeah, ripoff.

Details, detail, details! We have none. Relax for a bit til they show up. We have a director, cast, and some leaked brainstorming.

 

[VenomsMom]

This sucks big time! I was hoping Jason Sudeikis was playing Peter Venkman in a remake. And Kevin Hart for Winston.

 

[Octoberist]

Actually i prefer if they don't remake the original like that with a new Venkman or whatever.

 

[VenomsMom]

They can reboot it for all I care. Harold Ramis is gone and Bill Murray don't care. Just reboot it and recast the original characters with a new story. Jason Sudeikis should have been cast as lead. Now we got Ghostbusters starring Melissa McCarthy


Boooooooo

 

[Apollo]

Since this isn't part of the Ghostbuster continuity... This thread shouldn't be called Ghostbusters 3 anymore.

Ghostbusters 2016 Reboot is more accurate.

 

[Rocketman]

I would have no problem with Wiig and McCarthy in a reboot to this:

 

[JangoNate]

I would have no problem with Wiig and McCarthy in a reboot to this:

Now THAT is a GB ripoff. Let's do Ghostbusters, but aliens instead of ghosts. Oh, and the Egon character's actually the black guy.

There may not have been a proton pack and ghost trap, but it followed all of the same beats.

 

[Vaibow]

Now THAT is a GB ripoff. Let's do Ghostbusters, but aliens instead of ghosts. Oh, and the Egon character's actually the black guy.

There may not have been a proton pack and ghost trap, but it followed all of the same beats.

Rip off it may be, but at least the director didn't say...

Ghosts, what are they? Inter dimensional beings from space??? Let's reboot the ghostbusters with a cool, new modern twist. Which is exactly what this new project feels like.

 

[TheDreamMaster]

Now THAT is a GB ripoff. Let's do Ghostbusters, but aliens instead of ghosts. Oh, and the Egon character's actually the black guy.

There may not have been a proton pack and ghost trap, but it followed all of the same beats.

Ivan Reitman made that movie though, so I really cannot call it a rip off. Plus I did like Evolution, so....

 

[Urich Leeds]

I would have no problem with Wiig and McCarthy in a reboot to this:

Ripoff or not, I love that movie.

And Reitman has every right to ripoff his other work. Namely Ghostbusters.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I also love Evolution. I wouldn't call it a ripoff so much as a spiritual successor. In fact it's a hell of a lot better than Ghostbusters 2.

 

[Urich Leeds]

I can't believe we're still having this discussion.

Because the concept of Ghostbusters has merit, period.

If it was called something else, it would just be deemed a Ghostbusters ripoff.

Agreed. I think the issue is here isn't that it called Ghostbusters; far from it: It's them trying to have their cake and eat it too. They're trying to package it the same as the Reitman/Murray films (Logo, Tagline, Cast and character formula) when it has nothing to do with them.

The Reitman/Murray films didn't package itself the same as the Filmation Ghostbusters (Live action show/Post-'84 toon where the GB name originated), and vice versa. And this, being totally new and having nothing to do with the '84/'89 films, should do the same.

Be different and embrace it; Or just be the true, straight up remake/reboot we all wanted, complete with the '84 film characters.

 

[bullets]

Even though it's sort of like the original in concept, they seem to be distancing this movie away from everything involving the original franchise. If this is the case, then why even call it Ghostbusters?

I'm sure they could have called this movie something else.

"It's not called show-integrity , it's called show-business" - Kevin Smith

 

[bullets]

I still need to see Evolution and keep forgetting to watch that.

 

[JangoNate]

I still need to see Evolution and keep forgetting to watch that.

It's a decent flick. As I was watching it, though, I was like this is great and... familiar. Wait a minute! This is Ghostbusters with aliens and Donkey Lips!

Cacaw! Cacaw!

 

[JangoNate]

I also love Evolution. I wouldn't call it a ripoff so much as a spiritual successor. In fact it's a hell of a lot better than Ghostbusters 2.

I liked Evolution, but I loved Ghostbusters 2. I still do not understand the disdain for it. It's not the fresh new idea that the first one is, but I today still laugh at it and I actually appreciated the score and monsters a lot more than GB1. I also liked the slightly more creepy, scary feel.

 

[JangoNate]

Rip off it may be, but at least the director didn't say...

Ghosts, what are they? Inter dimensional beings from space??? Let's reboot the ghostbusters with a cool, new modern twist. Which is exactly what this new project feels like.

Isn't this the purpose of every reboot/sequel, to broaden a franchise to a new, modern audience? I don't consider that a jab at the new movie.

 

[ShadowBoxer]

I hate to be redundant but I just can't get excited about this movie. I just do like the fact that they don't want the movie to be in continuity or even acknowledge the original movies. There are much better solutions out there than what they are giving us. I watched Ghostbusters 1&2 last week and got disappointed that none of the magic of those movies will be present in the 2016 film. Again, I am not really mad the ghostbusters are females, but the one cast member I am really not looking forward to seeing is Mcarthy. I don't hate her, and she has her charm. But at this point, I am tired of her comedy routine. It's nothing but " O look at me I am fat, isn't it funny?". It's the same as Rebel Wilson both have the same comedy routine. Honestly, I think everyone should consider the 2009 Ghostbusters game the offical Ghostbusters 3.


I wonder what the remainder of the original cast thinks about this. I know Ernie Hudson, flip flopped about the idea of female ghostbusters. I don't know if Dan Said anything about this movie. Bill Murray was one of the reasons Ghostbusters 3 never got of the ground in the first place, so I know he doesn't give a crap. But definitely would love to hear Dan's thoughts.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

this is the REAL Ghostbusters 3

 

[Urich Leeds]

I liked Evolution, but I loved Ghostbusters 2. I still do not understand the disdain for it. It's not the fresh new idea that the first one is, but I today still laugh at it and I actually appreciated the score and monsters a lot more than GB1. I also liked the slightly more creepy, scary feel.

Agreed. I also give it points for having the main villain be a ghost, unlike Gozer, who was a God.

 

[Urich Leeds]

this is the REAL Ghostbusters 3

Damn right.

If it weren't for that game existing, I'd probably be whining more than I am now.