Ghostbusters: Afterlife

[TheVileOne]

Probably a little bit of both. The more colorful outfits were better suited for a kids' cartoon than the plain beige jumpsuits from the movie. I'm assuming that they couldn't secure likeness rights so they changed them up, including the hair on Ray and Egon to make them stand out more. The voice actors sounded mostly similar to the guys from the movie, particularly Egon and Winston with Ray sounding the most different. I still get a kick out of the voice actor for Venkman being most famous for voicing Garfield, then Bill Murray voiced him in the movies 20 years later.

Rick & Morty!

 

[Dr. Evil]

So Rudd's a teacher in this one......he needs a break from saving the world anyways.

 

[Bren]

Teachers can save the world, one student at a time.

 

[BrollySupersj]

New trailer was pretty damn good, very convincing. I'll admit though it was strange not to see many quips. Guess they're saving those? Either way I'm in.

 

[Frodo]

Teachers can save the world, one student at a time.

I come from a family of teachers, and no truer words have been spoken.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Annie Potts could still get it.

Does anyone know why The Real Ghostbusters altered the appearances of the actors? Did they do that so they wouldn’t have to pay them to use their likenesses? Or was there some other reason (i.e., Murray, Ramis, etc. didn’t want to be associated with it)?

The original animation pilot for the series did use designs that looked closer to the actors, and movie accurate suits, and Slimer as a bad guy ghost. Its really good piece of animation.

Obviously they didn't have the likeness rights for the actors and that would've been too expensive for the show, so that's why we get Egon with blond hair instead of black.

 

[DyeLorean]

Yeah, I didn't know about the original pilot with the movie-accurate jumpsuits until quite recently.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Interestingly enough, Batman The Animated Series also had a "promo pilot". Made by Bruce Timm and Eric Radomski to get themselves hired for the show (it worked) and both the Real Ghostbusters and Batman The Animated Series promo pilots became the basis for each show's opening intros.

 

[Frodo]

People forgot that Ghostbusters also had a hit soundtrack, which also made the film part of Pop culture







Here are some original trailers.

 

[StarLord]

Better look at Gozer's temple from the Malaysian trailer.

Spoiler

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I found these at Ghostbusters News

Thank you Star-Lord. That's amazing.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

But the original wasn’t an Amblin film. This film looks too reverential to the other ones instead of continuing the legacy of being about a bunch of goofballs who bust ghosts. I don’t want another Force Awakens situation. I want a new story in the same universe, not a rehash of the originals.

I am glad I'm not the only one feeling this in some way.

Too reverential was my takeaway as well.

The 2016 film is... Mediocre at best. It's not a great movie... It's not a trainwreck either just a lackluster comedy. I think that's the mistake IT made. It went balls to the walls with it being a full on comedy and everything else was thrown to the wayside.

This misses the mark as to what made the 84 film work as well as it did.

That said, this trailer is going in the other direction and I don't know if that's the answer either. I mean... GB '84 is the same film where the lead "hero" is a giant dick to everyone (Venkman is a HUGE A-hole... Accept it. ) and Ray Stantz dreams about getting an undead hummer... The DNA of the films the cast and crew were a part of before GB is more than apparent. From Animal House to Stripes THAT sense of humor is threaded from start to finish. And... It's not "Kid" humor, despite so many of us imbibing this movie well before our teenage years and mashing up the movie with the cartoon series in our minds.

So... I can't say the trailer made me go "Yes... THIS is Ghostbusters" because it seems to have a regard for the film I'm not sure resonates with what the original was to a large extent.

 

[Fincher]

Oh, Venkman was absolutely an a*****e. I can see that this isn't the same thing as the original movie, I'm just fine with that. I was fine with it in 2016, for that matter; I just didn't think it came together in a way that worked out. I don't really come into these legacy sequels looking for nostalgia even if I sometimes feel nostalgia when I'm watching, but the way the new characters respond to the original ones can make sense in the context of the story they're telling. It makes sense in The Force Awakens that Luke is a mysterious figure who's treated like a legend even if you didn't know there were any Star Wars movies before that. It makes sense that Han refers to the Falcon as "home" even though we know why that was put there.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

I actually watched the 2016 Ghostbusters movie (the extended version) last night. Big mistake.

 

[samsnee]

That movie felt like a Judd Apatow movie cosplaying as Ghostbusters. The fact that they shot parts of it in Boston and tried to pass it off as NYC is insulting.

Anyway, Venkman was a definite a-hole. The first time we see him, he’s taking pleasure from electrocuting someone.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

That movie felt like a Judd Apatow movie cosplaying as Ghostbusters. The fact that they shot parts of it in Boston and tried to pass it off as NYC is insulting.

Anyway, Venkman was a definite a-hole. The first time we see him, he’s taking pleasure from electrocuting someone.

Very un-Spielbergian.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

That movie felt like a Judd Apatow movie cosplaying as Ghostbusters. The fact that they shot parts of it in Boston and tried to pass it off as NYC is insulting.

Anyway, Venkman was a definite a-hole. The first time we see him, he’s taking pleasure from electrocuting someone.

Very un-Spielbergian.

 

[Drizzle]

People forgot that Ghostbusters also had a hit soundtrack, which also made the film part of Pop culture







Here are some original trailers.

I don't know who could forget that. The first thing I think of when Ghostbusters is mentioned is that classic song.

 

[moviefreak]

Sorry, I feel that they should lay off some of the 1980s films. It's a futile attempt to recreate films that catered specifically for that era by the likes of John Hughes, Spielberg, Zemeckis - these kind of films cannot be recreated in the 1990s, 2000s, 2010s & 2020s.

Looking at you JJ Abrams, one of the worst, unoriginal purveyor of film nostalgia.

 

[Frodo]

I don't know who could forget that. The first thing I think of when Ghostbusters is mentioned is that classic song.

People remember the song, but alot also forget, or more likely, just don't know, that the film soundtrack album itself was a big hit.

Ghostbusters came out in a time while film soundtracks could be as intrigal to the success of a film as the film itself .

In the 80s and into the 90s, films like Top Gun, Ghostbusters, Back To The Future, Batman 1989, and countless others, also had hit albums and hit videos which also propelled the films into the culture.

They were as much apart of the hype and excitement around the films as the films themselves.

Alot of younger people today really aren't going to appreciate about those older films, that even if they've heard of the films.

Today, there are films like In The Heights and Guardians Of The Galaxy who will have hit soundtracks , but those are few and far between now, where as back in the day ,it would be common for a big and smaller Hollywood action, comedy, or drama films to have a popular soundtracks and videos to accompany it.

It was part of the whole package, and you may have bought the soundtrack without even seeing the film.

But it was a different time.

 

[BatLobster]

My response to the whole "it's too reverant, this wasn't the tone of the originals" take is...

Well, for one, this is still a trailer. A trailer that is marketing the nostalgia of a near 40 year old franchise. It doesn't give us the full tone of the film.

Secondly, where is the rule that says every film in a franchise has to be cut from the exact same cloth? This is doing a sequel decades later. It would also be kind of weird if it was just....welp, Peter, Ray and Winston are just still at it in their 70s, bustin' ghosts in the big city. Same formula, it's just Ghostbusters 3, minus Egon. I don't think that works at this point. The ship sailed on that type of sequel, especially when Harold Ramis passed away.

The options for a legacy sequel IMO were, you show that Ghostbusters has grown into a mega corporation, with maybe Venkman sitting on the board of directors and some rift between the guys, and similar angle where Ray and some new characters are trying to piece together something that Egon was researching before he died.

Or, the way they're doing it, where the Ghostbusters are seemingly shunned again by the mainstream and you have Egon's family learning about the legacy.

I would've loved to see option 1 and a true "Ghostbusters 3", but I think what they're doing makes a heck of a lot of sense. Especially when you consider the fact that kids still do love Ghostbusters. I feel pretty confident that if nothing else, kids are going to love the crap out of this new movie. This movie is clearly designed for people who grew up with the originals to take their kids to. And what's wrong with that? The cross-generation appeal is already there.

The idea of "well the original was just a comedy!"...no, maybe that's what they set out to make originally, but it transcended that. That is why there were cartoons, video games, toys, etc. and a generation of kids who grew up obsessed with it. I think it's totally fair game to incorporate the pop culture reality that is/was the Ghostbusters phenomenon and lean into that with some reverence. It WILL be emotional to see that story continued, especially when it seemed like it was never going to happen.

And I'm sure it will still be funny!

 

[henzINNIT]

I don't think the film will be as reverent as the trailer might appear. I think Rudd will be a bit of a fanboy and the joke will be that the kids don't have the nostalgia at all. Except Phoebe of course, who is learning about her weird old granddad.

 

[DarkKnight88]

Secondly, where is the rule that says every film in a franchise has to be cut from the exact same cloth? This is doing a sequel decades later. It would also be kind of weird if it was just....welp, Peter, Ray and Winston are just still at it in their 70s, bustin' ghosts in the big city. Same formula, it's just Ghostbusters 3, minus Egon. I don't think that works at this point. The ship sailed on that type of sequel, especially when Harold Ramis passed away.

People seem to forget that two of the greatest sequels had different tones than their originals.

Alien went from a horror film to Aliens an action film.

The Terminator went from a horror film to Terminator 2 action even comedic film.

People would lose their minds on Twitter back then if they saw the Terminator smile and reciting quips, “they teamed him with a kid!”

 

[BatLobster]

I don't think the film will be as reverent as the trailer might appear. I think Rudd will be a bit of a fanboy and the joke will be that the kids don't have the nostalgia at all. Except Phoebe of course, who is learning about her weird old granddad.

I think you could be on the money with that.

People seem to forget that two of the greatest sequels had different tones than their originals.

Alien went from a horror film to Aliens an action film.

The Terminator went from a horror film to Terminator 2 action even comedic film.

People would lose their minds on Twitter back then if they saw the Terminator smile and reciting quips, “they teamed him with a kid!”

Excellent point.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

People seem to forget that two of the greatest sequels had different tones than their originals.

Alien went from a horror film to Aliens an action film.

The Terminator went from a horror film to Terminator 2 action even comedic film.

People would lose their minds on Twitter back then if they saw the Terminator smile and reciting quips, “they teamed him with a kid!”

This was going to be my reply. Thanks for saving me time.