|
Ehud posted:Annie Potts doing a bit as Janine. She talks about how the Ghostbusters have been in business for 30 years and stuff. I thought it was pretty cute. Glad I called it. Also, watching through the new set, and am disappointed we didn't get more deleted scenes. I was hoping to see the whole Fort scene from the original, as well as the bits where Ray starts to lose it in II. But it's still pretty nifty. They look great, and it's very nice to finally have II on blu-ray. Glad to have the music videos. Now I have Columbo cheering on the Ghostbusters on blu-ray. What more could I ask for? edit: Oh God is that Donald Trump in the "On Our Own" music video? egon_beeblebrox fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Sep 18, 2014 |
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Has anyone picked up the blu-ray pack yet? Well, that's neat. Most of the deleted scenes felt pretty redundant though, so I guess I'm glad we were never missing much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
Scroto Baggins posted:Well, that's neat. Most of the deleted scenes felt pretty redundant though, so I guess I'm glad we were never missing much. Well it seems like a few of them were re-written into different scenes that ended up in the final movie. And thank god they did. I know it's probably just a rough cut, but the timing and pacing in that alternate "all you can eat at the Sizzler" scene is DREADFUL.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
 Top to bottom: From top to bottom: 1999 DVD, 1999 DVD, 2009 Blu-ray, 2013 4K remastered Blu-ray, 2014 Blu-ray re-release. (And I'm about 90 percent certain there's a VHS copy floating around somewhere in the house.) Don't judge me. Edit: After watching the deleted scenes, I think this gives me and echoplex more groundwork to figure out what was re-shot and when -- Ramis' hair is completely different in the two versions of the "Sizzler" scene, and I think Hudson's might be, too, which would suggest that was part of one of the many re-shoots. Obviously there was material added in the final cut to the scene at Gracie Mansion, too, but we already knew that from the trailer. I'm also disappointed that the collection isn't exhaustive. Beyond the "Ray goes crazy" segment already mentioned, I was really hoping to see the Sherman Tully footage with Eugene Levy. Timby fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Sep 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
I am so grateful that every single one of those Ghostbusters deleted scenes isn't in the movie. They are all so so crappy. The couple in the Sedgwick, the hobos. Yuck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Someone on GBFans added in the stream for Louis' scene. Kinda neat, but still reeks of RGB. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNsqa2EJHQ8
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
Timby posted:(And I'm about 90 percent certain there's a VHS copy floating around somewhere in the house.) Pretty sure I still have my original VHS release in a box of old tapes. It was the VERY first videotape we bought when we got our first VCR back when I was a kid. Now I feel old.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
I remember the videotape for Ghostbusters 2. The thing that sticks out in my mind is how it was letterboxed AND pan and scanned. I think the film was letterboxed to a 1.66:1 aspect ratio, and they just panned and scanned from the 2.35:1 frame into that aspect ratio. It was just kind of bizarre to have this letterbox tape but not actually be real letterbox. I have no clue why they did it that way, but that's the way they went.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:I remember the videotape for Ghostbusters 2. The thing that sticks out in my mind is how it was letterboxed AND pan and scanned. I think the film was letterboxed to a 1.66:1 aspect ratio, and they just panned and scanned from the 2.35:1 frame into that aspect ratio. It was just kind of bizarre to have this letterbox tape but not actually be real letterbox. I have no clue why they did it that way, but that's the way they went. Oh my god, I remember that! It was my only 'widescreen' movie I owned. I also grew up mostly watching the tv edit of GB1. Glad to see the alternate takes on the new bluray release.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
AlliedBiscuit posted:I am so grateful that every single one of those Ghostbusters deleted scenes isn't in the movie. They are all so so crappy. The couple in the Sedgwick, the hobos. Yuck. I feel the same way about the Dumb and Dumber deleted scenes. A lot of it is deleted "extended" scenes, but it makes a HUGE difference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
CaptainHollywood posted:I feel the same way about the Dumb and Dumber deleted scenes. Speaking of Dumb and Dumber, here's something I may have noticed, or I could just be making up my own connection... The deleted lines from when they're in the hotel has Lloyd making a bunch of gay jokes and comments about Harry. He's actually kind of mean and unrelenting with them. Later on, when they go to Aspen, they walk past another couple, and, as we all remember, Harry says 'jeez, wouldja look at the butt on that!'. Lloyd then says 'Yeah, he must work out'. Normally, you'd think 'oh Lloyd totally misunderstood' but he also gives Harry this sly look, like 'you like that, don't you?' This is an incredibly pointless derail, but I think the scene was a call back to stuff that didn't make it into the final cut.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
A pretty good article detailing (again) the goodness of Ghostbusters 2. http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ghostbusters/32190/defending-ghostbusters-ii
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:As an experiment I wrote a quick blurb about a short comment made by Aykroyd well over a year ago and posted it to the movie car Facebook page. Lol, Ghostbusters grabs a Prius for the new car
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 10:31
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:A pretty good article detailing (again) the goodness of Ghostbusters 2. That article is poorly written and raises a few good points. Just like Ghostbusters 2.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
Scroto Baggins posted:That article is poorly written and raises a few good points. Just like Ghostbusters 2. Well, much like Ghostbusters 2, I still liked it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Short, but pointless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Well, much like Ghostbusters 2, I still liked it. I agree. And maybe it is because it's one of the first films I remember seeing in theaters, but I like GB2 way more than I probably should. I used to play the VHS constantly and rock out to the soundtrack playing over the end credits.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Is there any site that has pretty much any and every detail about the Ecto-1/Ecto-1A? I'm not a car guy by any means, I don't know poo poo about poo poo, but for that car, I'm willing to learn.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Is there any site that has pretty much any and every detail about the Ecto-1/Ecto-1A? I'm not a car guy by any means, I don't know poo poo about poo poo, but for that car, I'm willing to learn. Last one I saw that was nearly comprehensive was a geocities site that is now dead. The GBfans wiki page has a ton of info. There used to be an Ecto-1 builders forum that had part numbers and dimensions, but it is gone now as well. Is there anything specific you want to know, or an area that is of interest? What the parts are, information and history of the original car, etc?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Is there any site that has pretty much any and every detail about the Ecto-1/Ecto-1A? I'm not a car guy by any means, I don't know poo poo about poo poo, but for that car, I'm willing to learn. I'm pretty sure there's a thread about it on TheRPF, they're usually pretty accurate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
welp. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Soulwrangler posted:welp. ... does... does this mean Dan's most recent announcement actually turned out to be true? Awesome. Hope he and Winston get cameos 
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Ugh. Boo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
My only issue with Feig's plan for a third film is that it's looking like it'll be a reboot. Just make a sequel!
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Meh, this is probably the second best outcome we could have hoped for. (Best would have been if Phil Lord and Chris Miller took it.) I just hope it's not a total reboot. There's no point in trying to make a remake/reboot of an already perfect movie. Just make a sequel. EDIT: And please God no Melissa McCarthy. OldSenileGuy fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Oct 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Feig's a perfect choice. You know he was one of the nerds who loved it to death. He's talked about what an influence The Jerk was on his adolescence, and I feel there's a pretty big overlap there between audiences even if the movies strike different tones. Still, how many scripts from Akroyd have died on arrival?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Probably only two or three drafts of Hellbent. That was Sony's go-to in 1997, then shelved. When the project rose from the grave in the late 2000s it was always a new duo or solitary writer. Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky were Harold Ramis' picks before Year One bombed and those scripts stuck around for a while. I heard from a friend that Eisenberg and Stupnitsky dreaded the entire experience-- at any point Ramis, Aykroyd, Reitman, or the studio could demand an entire wipe and start the whole process over while having to simultaneously write two different drafts: one without Murray and one with. Etan Cohen was brought in to polish or rewrite those drafts entirely and then there's a lull. Either the 30th anniversary (or creepily Ramis'death) coupled with Amazing Spider-Man 2's less than stellar franchise opportunities renewed fire underneath Ghostbusters and things started moving behind the scenes to get something ghostbusters into theaters. Lord and Miller sadly passed, Ruben Fleischer may or may not have been courted at one point, there was that weird Max Landis/Nikki Finke sabotage thing that I still think was discussed by higher ups at Sony, and now Feig. I will be genuinely surprised if the team is entirely female but I fully expect a female lead that is not a damsel in distress. Cautiously excited.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:My only issue with Feig's plan for a third film is that it's looking like it'll be a reboot. Just make a sequel! Uhhh, why?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:04
|
|
|
I don't have a ton of interest in a reboot. Ghostbusters was great because of the cast. The concept is strong on its own, but it's my favorite comedy because of the guys and their chemistry. I'll keep up with the project and try to have an open mind, but I don't have a ton of immediate interest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 00:17
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Uhhh, why? Why wouldn't I want a reboot? Because I'd rather see a film that acknowledges past gb events, and moves forward, rather than one that starts over.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
I am curious about who they think would even have charisma to make it genuinely funny. I would hate to see McCarthy, Aubrey Plaza, Amy Schumer, or Sara Silverman. I think they are unfunny. I think Keri Kinner from Reno 911 is hilarious, Amy Sedaris has a great manic energy, Wiig, maybe even Vanessa Bayer. It will end up being megan fox and emma stone with mccarthy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
garfunkel and oates musical ghostbusters
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Why wouldn't I want a reboot? Because I'd rather see a film that acknowledges past gb events, and moves forward, rather than one that starts over. What would it acknowledge, given that at least two of the original Ghostbusters are not going to show up in the film and at best you'll end up in a Ghostbusters 2 "oh yeah that's all just made up" style of retcon? (Except slightly less silly because it's been 30 years)
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
computer parts posted:What would it acknowledge, given that at least two of the original Ghostbusters are not going to show up in the film and at best you'll end up in a Ghostbusters 2 "oh yeah that's all just made up" style of retcon? (Except slightly less silly because it's been 30 years) I guess I'm just really completely and utterly sick of reboots.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
DirtyDirt posted:I am curious about who they think would even have charisma to make it genuinely funny. I would hate to see McCarthy, Aubrey Plaza, Amy Schumer, or Sara Silverman. I think they are unfunny. I think Keri Kinner from Reno 911 is hilarious, Amy Sedaris has a great manic energy, Wiig, maybe even Vanessa Bayer. It will end up being megan fox and emma stone with mccarthy. A Ghostbuster take on Weigel would be pretty hysterical, I gotta admit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/10/08/paul-feig-ghostbusters-female/ Looks like it's going to be an all-female cast and a total reboot. On one hand, it does seem like it would be hard to make a direct sequel and maintain the same vibe as the original films. Some of the charm of the first two movies was that no one really believed in ghosts until everything went to poo poo (and promptly chose to believe an alternate explanation in which the world was not doomed as soon as they had the chance). Setting a sequel in the same world where everyone is already used to potential apocalypses makes it a bit more difficult to create the same scope. On the other hand, most reboots are terrible, too many reboots are being made, and people are getting sick of origin stories. The fact that this is being made as a reboot suggests that the production team doesn't have the ability to create a good story within the existing framework. The fact that they're casting all of the Ghostbusters as women does have a lot of potential if they can find actresses who create a good team dynamic. If the cast works well together and their interaction is unique, it might give the reboot a better chance of being judged on its own merits instead of being contrasted directly against the original.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Rachel, when someone asks you if you're a goddess you say YES.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Ghostbustiers
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Why do I have the feeling that this will just be "bridesmaids" mixed with "the heat" and unlicensed nuclear accelerators. Considering I really didn't like either of the two films I just mentioned, I am not optimistic about this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
A genderswapped reboot just sounds like some internet fanfiction bullshit to me. Like if someone scoured Tumblr all night just to say "Here's the best we got, Ghostbusters, BUT they're all women this time, or steampunk Ghostbusters".
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 04:01
|
|
