The New Ghostbusters - Part 6

[sueb1863]

So if this was an all male cast it still should have been a whole new film about "paranormal hunters"?

If all you're going to import from the original is the theme music and a few of the props, then yes.

There is no reason for this to be called Ghostbusters. The only similarities are that it's a comedy and they use the title, the music (sort of) and a few things like the car and the proton packs. Nobody from the first movie had anything to do with this one and it acts as if the first movie didn't happen. So why did it have to be Ghostbusters?

If you're going to get rid of so much of the original, you might as well go all the way and get rid of ALL of it and do your own story with new ideas so you're not tied to someone else's concept. Do something completely your own. Don't ask for grief by copying a classic movie unless what you've got is as good or better, because otherwise you're going to get slammed.

 

[Victarion]

I don't know. They have the gear, the science buddies, the Slimer. That's what the old guard had too.

 

[Nathan]

Anyone else not a fan of how vibrant and clean everything looks? It's great how far technology has advanced, but to me, all the Ghosts and the effects make it almost look like a cartoon. I don't even like the Ectoplasm, and that's just goo. But it looks like the stuff kids play with, and in the previous Movie it's just that really nasty, snot like substance.

 

[Victarion]

I wouldn't mind some more grotty ghosts like the terror dogs. Not the dogs themselves, but something created in the vein of them with the same sort of SFX.

 

[PyroChamber]

Watching the trailer again, I just realized they used the Proton Pack start up sound effect.

 

[Majik1387]

Anyone else not a fan of how vibrant and clean everything looks? It's great how far technology has advanced, but to me, all the Ghosts and the effects make it almost look like a cartoon. I don't even like the Ectoplasm, and that's just goo. But it looks like the stuff kids play with, and in the previous Movie it's just that really nasty, snot like substance.

Personally I love the new ghost effects. I think it's a great mix of the original 2 movies and incorporation of the cartoon designs. The original 2 movies varied between realistic looking ghost characters like the Librarian before she goes crazy, to puppetry cartoon like the Scoleri brothers in the courtroom scene.
As for the Ectoplasm, yeah, I wish it was a bit more plasma like instead of 90's Nickelodeon slime, but it doesn't look that bad nor does it take me out of the movie.

I've also seen this complaint about the setting being so vibrant and clean as well, and I like how someone else responded.

Compared to the 80s, yes today in 2016, we are a lot more conscious about our environment, whether it's nature or just basic cleaning of the cities we live in. In the 80s, everything was grimier and dirtier because upkeep of the cities we live in was not much of a focus for the majority of people then, at least not the way it is now.

 

[Guts]

Personally I love the new ghost effects. I think it's a great mix of the original 2 movies and incorporation of the cartoon designs. The original 2 movies varied between realistic looking ghost characters like the Librarian before she goes crazy, to puppetry cartoon like the Scoleri brothers in the courtroom scene.
As for the Ectoplasm, yeah, I wish it was a bit more plasma like instead of 90's Nickelodeon slime, but it doesn't look that bad nor does it take me out of the movie.

I've also seen this complaint about the setting being so vibrant and clean as well, and I like how someone else responded.

Compared to the 80s, yes today in 2016, we are alot more conscious about our environment, whether it's nature or just basic cleaning of the cities we live in. In the 80s, everything was grimier and dirtier because upkeep of the cities we live in was not much of a focus for the majority of people than, at least not the way it is now.

1980's New York did resemble modern day Detroit.

 

[Wheels]

I thought the effects were pretty solid. That's the one aspect that stood out as something positive. I already knew the costumes would look good so no surprise there. Now, if I could actually laugh during the second trailer then I'd feel much better.

 

[TheVileOne]

If all you're going to import from the original is the theme music and a few of the props, then yes.

There is no reason for this to be called Ghostbusters. The only similarities are that it's a comedy and they use the title, the music (sort of) and a few things like the car and the proton packs. Nobody from the first movie had anything to do with this one and it acts as if the first movie didn't happen. So why did it have to be Ghostbusters?

If you're going to get rid of so much of the original, you might as well go all the way and get rid of ALL of it and do your own story with new ideas so you're not tied to someone else's concept. Do something completely your own. Don't ask for grief by copying a classic movie unless what you've got is as good or better, because otherwise you're going to get slammed.

I agree. Don't make a Ghostbusters reboot, make something new and different maybe that's spiritually evocative.

FYI in some ways, Alien was also inspired by Kubrick's 2001. I recall one of the writers said it was sort of like a sci-fi B movie that was basically shot like 2001. Now Alien is sort of hailed as its own classic, but even with Alien they were inspired and informed by older works.

 

[JangoNate]

This is what I've been saying, too. But wouldn't that be 97% we don't know about?

We can use numbers to prove anything that's even remotely true. But trying to use numbers that represent a miniscule portion of not only the general audience, but the actual people who have watched something...that's just silly.

From a marketing standpoint, Feig's previous movies' marketing campaigns, particularly movies like HEAT and SPY give me some hope because I didn't care for those trailers much and found them a bit broad and cheap, but as with most of Feig's movies, the actual movies are a lot funnier and cleverer (more clever?) than the trailers make them seem.

From a marketing standpoint, we can split hairs all day about whether they should have done this or that better, but film marketing, while an art in itself, is nontheless not designed to be or to showcase high art at every turn. It's designed to put butts in seats with the broadest appeal.

In that context, it couldn't be clearer to me that this trailer was designed to sell fans of these women on the fact that these women are in this type of movie. That's likely why you're getting very broad, simple, easy to digest jokes that are, not surprisingly, being labeled "typical McCarthy", "typical Wiig", and to some extent, "typical Leslie Jones". I don't think it's an accident that these are the clips we're seeing. Because the studio needs general audiences and fans of these women to make this film a hit, and general audiences have responded to these styles of comedy from these women in the past. These are the types of comedy people remember them for.

And shocker...just because some people didn't like the style of comedy on display...a lot of people did, and will. Many of them are casual Ghostbusters fans who won't care about the nuances of the franchise.

For what it's worth, and I don't care to use this to "prove" anything, but I'm seeing much of the media and social media embrace this. A lot of positive articles, etc.

I think the doomsaying is a bit much.

Ha ha ha! My math apparently stinks. Yes! 97% op the opinions for the trailer go unknown. Thank you, sir, for the correction.

And, yes, what you said. Never looked at the comedy chosen for the actresses being there to attract their usual fans.

 

[Broseph44]

I thought the effects were pretty solid. That's the one aspect that stood out as something positive. I already knew the costumes would look good so no surprise there. Now, if I could actually laugh during the second trailer then I'd feel much better.

Yeah some laughs would be good.

 

[Astro13Zombie]

1980's New York did resemble modern day Detroit.

But that's 1997.

 

[def28]

I'm sure this has been posted but the recut fan teaser has been getting a much more positive reception. Check out that like/dislike ratio.

[YT]8IDXpOX0Cp0[/YT]

 

[jmc]

That's tells you something right there.

 

[JangoNate]

Man, I really like that trailer. A great teaser and probably what we should of got. Then you take time to prepare a story trailer with less nods next. Hmmm. That might of saved a few headaches.

 

[Slushy]

I'll admit it doesn't look good, but I'm going to watch it anyway because its Ghostbusters.

 

[bluejake01]

Leslie Jones is fighting back against the criticism. I really wish they hadn't used that Scene in the trailer...it gives the impression that her character is a one note walking stereotype.

 

[bluejake01]

http://thegrio.com/2016/03/04/leslie-jones-ghostbusters-backlash/

 

[Majik1387]

I just find Jones has no comic delivery. At first I thought it was because the skits on SNL are always less than stellar, but she really has no comedic talent from what I've seen.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

But that's 1997.

Also,if I remember correctly ESCAPE was filmed in Cleveland.

 

[def28]

Leslie Jones is fighting back against the criticism. I really wish they hadn't used that Scene in the trailer...it gives the impression that her character is a one note walking stereotype.

I'm fairly confident that the trailer was a frankenstein result of the studio doing testing.

I know you can't talk about it much blujake but I was wondering if you could confirm something. The youtuber who talked about the trailer testing mentioned a joke with McKinnon regarding Pringles that they didn't think played too well and was in all the trailers. I'm assuming that it's probably something like her making too much noise during that first ghost encounter. But did you think that would have been a good moment to keep? If anything right now McKinnon is the one we all want to see more of, so I find it odd they would cut her down.

 

[GuestStar2004]

When the best trailer that tested well is the one getting the negativity... Does that say something about this movie?

 

[def28]

When the best trailer that tested well is the one getting the negativity... Does that say something about this movie?

Not all the time. For example the GOTG trailer that was used was hated by test screenings. But it worked pretty friggin well. Can't always bank on the people that come in to tell you how to cut your trailer.

Pretty sure scenes were mixed and matched though. Not that one was chosen over the other. But just an assumption.

 

[super85]

That's an awful trailer. I mean there is nothing remotely funny in it, and everything feels just tired. The Lesley Jones character seems as lame as all of the characters she usually plays on SNL. "its comedy if you yell a lot!!!" sigh

Part of what made the original movie fun was that the actors (maybe with the exception of Rick Moranis) played their parts straight. This looks like an Paul Feig Scooby Doo film.

 

[Flint Marko]

Not all the time. For example the GOTG trailer that was used was hated by test screenings. But it worked pretty friggin well. Can't always bank on the people that come in to tell you how to cut your trailer.

Pretty sure scenes were mixed and matched though. Not that one was chosen over the other. But just an assumption.

Was the GOTG trailer really hated by test screenings?