|
Lone Rogue posted:I think we can all agree there's a good 20 comedian/actors who would be perfect as Ghostbusters. Guys who can juggle being serious, normal and comedic. Paul Rudd or MAYBE Jason Lee as Venkman is something they would have been very well suited for a long time ago. Too bad they couldn't have done a reboot some 10-12 years ago when he was closer to Murray's age in the first film. Ryan Reynolds likely really needs a massive hit, so I wouldn't be surprised if they wouldn't try to tag him on a Venkman type. As an oddball choice, maybe they could get David Tennant as a sort of charming Brit version of the character. Egon is really probably the hard one to cast in this sort of thing if you end up going a full reboot. You need someone who has that perfect mix of smart, restrained, odd and still pretty attractive to the ladies. So, they'd probably get the guy who played Spock in the JJTrek or even someone like the guy who plays Sherlock Holmes in the TV show.
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2011 11:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:51 |
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:I could see this legitimately working if Gillian Anderson is involved. She really wants to be; do the right thing, Feig. Have her come in as the government bureaucrat Wilma Peck who is trying shut down the group. CaptainHollywood posted:This kinda got me thinking. We recently got failed "reboots" of Caddyshack and Airplane. So the real question is: All Blacks Ghostbusters. It's about a New Zealand Rugby team that must fight ghosts that Peter Jackson has released into their homeland as the ultimate special effect for his 3 picture LOTR spin-off about the ghost army.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2014 06:54
|
|
|
I think some people feel a bit uneasy with any new Ghostbusters for many reasons, some harder to pin down than others. For me, in a way, I was a bit leery of the Aykroyd pitches because with the way computers and effects and budgets have grown so much in several years, coupled with the popularity of the franchise, I had a fear that there wouldn't be anyone willing to be a grounding force willing to scale it back. I just think back to some of the talked about plots to GB3 over the years, or the original draft of GB1, and think that there were things that just didn't feel like they had the Ghostbusters magic to them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
Aykroyd should fast-track a Shakespeare in Love-styled 'true story' of them holed up in Martha's Vineyard writing Ghostbusters where they have a series of real paranormal experiences that inspires the script. Call it "Ghostwriters" with the tagline "Are you ready to believe this?"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Soulwrangler posted:No Dana. I'm probably not going to get a chance to read the PDFs, but I've felt that Dana's role in GB2 feels like it might have worked a lot better and maybe have been intended for a non-Dana, new character and it was maybe rewritten at the last minute to provide a role for Weaver in the film. Is there a still a mother/baby storyline in the script?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
If nothing else, I do find what you describe as some of the overall differences to be really intriguing and sort of wonder how that film would have turned out. I may have to make time to track that down and read it now. The Vigodaddy aspect is sort of maybe too much for a film of that time/tone, though and the ending sounds simply going back to a Stay-Puft giant monster well.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
It sort of feels like in some ways that script is sort of a slide back into the original Ghostbusters drafts of it being more strange and magical with a much larger universe of stuff for them to deal with. That sort of progression makes me think Ghostbusters in Hell as GB3 then almost sort of works a bit more. First film is strange ghosts and other dimensional entities. Second film is a magical wizard with strange new powers and I guess fewer of the established ghost elements of the first film. A third film with a focus on literal Hell as a place seems almost 'normal'. Granted, second film is already a magic wizard type guy with strange new powers, but GB2 as it is still sounds almost like it is more like GB1 than the earlier GB2 draft. JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Nov 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:http://ghostbusters.wikia.com/wiki/Ghostbusters_II_August_5,_1988_Draft With just another draft or two, that film could have actually worked better than the actual GB2. With comic book remakes of alternate scripts having had some popularity these days -- Ellison's Edge of Forever original vision, Miller's Robocop 2 pitch, Schumacher talking about doing for his post-Batman and Robin stories -- in comic book form, I'm sort of surprised they haven't blown this script off and given it a tune up and done just that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 03:15
|
|
levels of detail, ehich I appreciated and read every last word of.
|
Soulwrangler posted:The movie ends with Janine walking into the break room and seeing the spectral images of Venkman, Stantz, and Spengler playing cards. Venkman looks at her says "Just don't tell the health inspector." End of movie. Okay, I'll admit, I like this part. There are little bits in there that I sort of like from that description, too, but maybe in part because they remind me of some of my own thoughts on how they could have done another GB film by using the idea the 'meta' commentary that because the Ghostbusters weren't the best businessmen, they failed to properly protect their IP, designs and brand, resulting a copycat paranormal teams running around as they defiantly promote themselves as the REAL Ghostbusters.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
I could maybe see them moving the GB franchise out of NYC to somewhere else where they could maybe have an excuse to pull a bit of a National Treasure secret history of the world sort of thing. Boston, London, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Atlanta, etc. Now I just want CBS to produce NCIS: GB or CSI: GB.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:Now I want Tina Fey as Wilma Peck. No, you'll get Jane Curtain as a Hillary Clinton-esque Peck.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
I hope the movie turns out to be the original Ghostbusters exists in the new film universe as the 80s movie, its sequel, a video game and a few cartoons series and comics. Then, the entire film is everyone commenting on their every action, choice and personality and judging it by the standards of what happened in the original film. Aykroyd and Sony and Filmation lawyers replace Peck as the main red-tape antagonist, showing up and telling them to shut it down, shut it all down, due to unapproved use of the names and trademarks owned jointly by those groups.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
The one sort of downside to it is that it could become something like another Sony big-budget supernatural comedy remake: Bewitched. A film that treated the idea of the concept of Bewitched was not only an in-universe TV show, but there was an in-universe plot that was playing out that mirrored and was aware of that 'fictional' property, too. I'll throw this out there. SF/Fantasy/Horror-Comedy is a very difficult genre of film do to well and be received well. No matter the opinion on the new GB cast and direction, it's a genre that has produced several huge budgeted flops in the last 20 years, all things considered, in addition to the hits. It' seems like a formula that is hard to try to get to work right.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Hopefully you see the joke here: the simplest way to save Ghostbusters II would be to take the focus off the four dudes and have it center around a female protagonist. Secret Ghostbusters movie: An entire film is about a non-Dana character dealing with horrific supernatural stuff happening in her life and her baby and no one believes her, she's all alone facing the horrors of the otherworldly, then the final 10 minutes of the film is her finally calling Ghostbusters who solve all her problems and leave her with a bill and a wrecked apartment. Ghostbusters theme song cheerfully blaring and taking us to credits as she curls up in what's left of her ruined apartment, clutching her baby, speechless. Sort of an American version of Big Man Japan.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's not entirely necessary, but think of the ending of Ghostbusters 2: Important question, would she have been depicted as semi-topless to match the outfits of the rest of the gang? I don't fully know how the artists of the referenced era depicted female characters in such works and I want to imagine Dana there with some cultural/artistic/historical accuracy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
I think I've mentioned this before, but I'm ready to assume one of those "Ghostbuster 3" drafts will probably some day get a comic book adaptation made just to shut everyone up. I still think Aykroyd and others should just do "Ghostwriters", instead: A fictionalized account of how the gang wrote the original Ghostbusters while dealing with a paranormal event that is hounding them at the same time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2015 07:36
|
|
|
echoplex posted:I'm essentially an old man ranting at clouds on this front though, I live in a world where you can buy a flying drone representation of the dead Harold Ramis for $40 I don't know why these exist, but please tell me that they make a Slimer of these or there's no point. http://www.hobbytron.com/GhostbustersLicensedSlimer2CHIRRCHelicopter.html edit: YES! I mean, it looks a bit crap, but the floating Slimer makes more sense than floating GBs. JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 05:41 on Feb 20, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
I think that's also an issue, too. Up until Ramis' death, people were very much supporting some sort of 'sequel' idea. Either the original team coming back, an official passing of the torch, something. Even after his death the idea of a reboot wasn't too popular. For the all-female team, though, I get that people might not be 100% on board with it. But the truth is that before the official cast ever got an announcement there was never any sort of proposed or rumored all-new cast that met with any sort of universal fan applause or acceptance, either. I'm not super thrilled by the new movie, but I don't know if it's the cast, the setting, or plot or what. But to put this in comparision, if Sony had announced a new Southern-styled GB reboot in 2005 with Larry the Cable Guy, Jamie Foxx, Justin Timberlake and Johnny Knoxville, or a 2012 announced a college-aged remake with Shia LeBeouf, Robert Pattinson, Michael B. Jordan and Kiera Knightly, I'd be equally unenthusiastic.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Either imaginary scenario is on par for likely being as much as a deviation from and/or loyal to the original source material and casts as rumors for the upcoming film is, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
With the 'retro-nostalgia' boom that has been sort of fluctuating over the last 6-7 years thanks to Mad Men, AHS, First Class/DOFP, Captain America, and with things like Man from Uncle coming out as a period pieces set in the mid-20th Century, I just started to imagine what if they'd been following that trend. Set the movie in the 1930s-1960s or something as final homage to the sort of things that Aykroyd I believe said inspired him to make Ghostbusters in the first place. (Prequel to the Ghostbusters 1: "The East Side Kids vs. Ivo Shandor.")
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2015 10:22
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Exactly. Fans totally miss the basic point of the film: the three main ghostbusters - through combined effort, and the help of some dude that they're paying - almost reach the level of one functional adult. Along these lines, too, Ghostbusters 1 sort of establishes a whole lot of various themes any remake can take and latch onto as THE defining element of a major reimagining and still point to it as being true and authentic to the original production. We can make the Ghostbusters blue-collar workin' folks because that's what they are in the first film. We can make the GB really smart college types, because that's what they are in the first film. We can go paramilitary with them because the first film had them cooperating with the National Guard. Out there fringe scientists and low-level con artists caught in a real paranormal situation. We can go amateur/TV ghost hunter-level types because we get that established, too. You can go traditional haunted house-level ghost stuff or extremely strange parallel dimension godlike beings. It can be very scary or incredibly goofy. First GB does all that in a single film. Then you have ALL the stuff from the original Aykroyd plans that you can go back to, too.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 09:03
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:Wait, how are they con men? The special on proto-charging? I'm sort of figuring in stuff like Peter's whole antics in Dana's apartment, not really knowing what's going on or what he's doing and acting like he's actually doing something. Peter and his ESP testing* at the school. Even their TV commercial thing could sort of have a 1-900 fake psychic hotline vibe to it to the uninitiated. (*Iffy, I guess. I'm sure he could flip around and defend his whole thing as, "Well, I NEED to lie and provide negative reinforcement to get accurate results to see if my theory is correct!")
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 10:59
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Exactly. It brings us back to the fundamental question of Ghostbusters fandom: I think they're stand ins for aliens from outer space, which do exist. Why do you think they cast Weaver in the movie? Jack Gladney posted:Nonwhite people who live in New York: Ernie Hudson, Reginald VelJohnson Everyone in NYC has seen poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Before the freak out happens, it sort of sounds based off the Deadline article that, if I'm getting it right: Specifically, using this quote as a starting point: quote:“This is a branded entertainment, a scary supernatural premise mixed with comedy. Paul Feig’s film will be the first version of that, shooting in June to come out in July 2016. He’s got four of the funniest women in the world, and there will be other surprises to come. The second film has a wonderful idea that builds on that. Drew will start writing and the hope is to be ready for the Russo Brothers’ next window next summer to shoot, with the movie coming out the following year. It’s just the beginning of what I hope will be a lot of wonderful movies.” -All-female Ghostbusters is still happening. A 'sequel' with a male cast is being planned. -Ghostcorps is a production company with the original GB folks and others and is being created to spin out Ghostbusters related stuff. -Comments were made that just about every GB plan for the last 25 years never happened because too many people had too much vetoing power. Some thoughts of mine that spring up immediately: -It might be that Sony wants to turn Ghostbusters into an Marvel Studios-styled series of films with one coming out every year, each with a focus on different characters, different enemies, different tone, but all in the same shared-universe of Ghostbuster stuff. -GhostCorps might end up being essentially their name for a GB-themed Avengers-like 'superteam', or the name of the 'guy' team. -They have an idea that has them really aiming for a new GB film for the Summer of 2016 and 2017. That kind of production and filming one at a time might require them to have more than one cast to let the actors do other movies. -It's more about maybe creating a brand that they can use to sell the property to audiences by letting them release more Ghostbusters-like horror-comedies under one production company.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2015 07:29
|
|
|
I don't get the instant hate that's going on. This might be a way for them to do a Halloween 3-Season of the Witch/Tales from the Crypt sort of semi-anthology series of films. It's possible a lot of things could be happening from this announcement. Even though Marvel/DC has a huge universe, I sort of contend that the animated series, comics and general folklore and mythology sort of lends itself to them being able to pick some high points to follow a franchise on. Sort of like Tales from the Crypt, maybe? LIke I said earlier in the thread, Ghostbusters 1 covered a lot of different qualities, and instead of trying to make ONE movie that that tries to be all of that and/or trying to only make a franchise that follows only one crew and make them redo all of that, it might be quicker for them to greenlight stuff that breaks key elements down to let them work with it in different films with different casts, themes, tones and settings that wouldn't work with another cast and setting. 2018: J-Horror Ghostbusters with a largely non-American cast. 2019: Italian Horror-inspired Ghostbusters. 2020: Cronenberghostbusters.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
I sort of want to speculate some things in a strange context when it comes to Ghostcorps and the future of Ghostbusters, and I'm probably repeating myself. The Ghostbusters property has lost about 20 years of time in getting anything made on the theatrical front when it came to GB3. Despite that, it's a franchise that has lived on in other formats and has grown outside of its core 4-6 'team players' of the films in those formats. Over those years, between the Sony and Aykroyd camps, I'm sure there have been pitches, story ideas, they've seen spec scripts for non-GB films they think could be adapted to fit the GB franchise, had drafts they've worked on, franchise outsiders from within the entertainment industry offering up what they'd do if they could have some stake in the production of a new Ghostbusters film. A lot has happened in those 20 years in the real world, too. On top of that, you have the questions of reboot, not reboot? Pass the torch, perpetuate the old team? Keep with the known and comfortable formula, do something new and different? Original writers or modern writers? Nothing ever came of it, but maybe not all of it has was instant crap, though. Maybe some of it is/has been good, they've been ideas that could work. But they wouldn't work as THE Ghostbusters movie they wanted to put their faith into. They might be good as something else, but it just doesn't quite fit for THE Ghostbusters, as it is/was. On the other hand, it still has enough qualities of A Ghostbusters-type thing to it... That's where maybe the Ghostcorps comes into play. Ideas and projects that aren't quite a good fit for "THE" Ghostbusters film series, but they've got something to them that could still be good in some form. Something that could be made and sold as a "Ghostcorp: The Producers of Ghostbusters(TM) Presents..."-branded project, where they'd have the benefits of having the brand-recognition and the permission to do something different.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2015 08:25
|
|
|
I think another issue with the chosen GB2016 cast is that so many of them stem from modern SNL. If you aren't a fan of modern SNL comedy stylings, if that's the direction the film will take in its performances and writing and acting, then you may not like the movie at all based just one that. But that's probably not a far argument to make given how many people associated with the original film similar came from the early days of SNL, themselves. Sony has had some hand in seemingly tried to reinvent the Ghostbusters formula in the last 20 years with varying degrees of success. MIB was heavily touted as THE Ghostbusters of the 90s, but after the second film the franchise was sort of let to vanish for a decade. Evolution was another attempt to do the formula, and it never caught on either. Pixels is coming out in a few months, and the teaser trailer already has me thinking of a giant Pac-Man as that movie's Stay-Puft. PriorMarcus posted:A Ghostbusters remake could be good. I would love to see a good Ghostbusters remake. I have nothing against reboots, remakes, reimaginings, adaptations, etc. I don't really agree with the feeling a lot of people have of that I feel consists of, "Hollywood continues to be creatively bankrupt, remakes old franchise!" because a lot of older projects that are good or bad I think can be done in some different way through a modern lens that gives them some merit in being made. I agree that I don't like anything I'm hearing of GB2016, but the words of the producers saying a planned Gb2017 is going to take something from that film and build upon it maybe does give the impression that they are going to building the universe into a bigger place and MAYBE falls into line with the original film's pitch from Peter of Ghostbusters being franchising rights alone making them rich, that something is maybe going to start happening where you need more than one team for the entire country. Heck, part of me even wondered that since over 30 years have passed since the original film and given the ages of the characters in this one, if maybe the film will throw a curveball and act like GB1 DID happen and people sort of treat it like a bit of a well-documented urban legend or mass hysteria + weather disaster, given the idea that all major paranormal activity sort of came to an end thanks to the events of that film. 32 years later, it was an event highly localized in NYC and while a culture has grown up where paranormal research stuff is still sort of mocked as a serious field of study, there also a large population of folks who believe in it as real. Between that and one of the original ideas I heard mentioned about GB'16 that I think has been dropped, I would be really surprised if GB'16 didn't feature Ray showing up by the end of the film in some way and pulling a Nick Fury/Iron Man sort of "You think you're the ONLY Ghostbusters...?"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
She'll have been one of the kids that had a Ghostbusters Birthday party in 1989. I'm sort of leaning towards it being a bit of something like that, though. I'm sort of thinking that one reason this is even getting off the ground is maybe Aykroyd was told he could have some sort of cameo in the film to establish, "Yeah, all that happened, it's just that everyone just forgot about it..." It wouldn't be totally out of place a thought. GB2 I think established the notion that just 5 years after the events of GB1 the concept of the GB and ghosts were thought of as a scam. Extending that out by 25 more years maybe increases that and while the first two films had increased paranormal activity sparked by single focal points of power that might not have had similar instances in the time since. Even their methods changed a bit for the type of things they fought between the GB1/GB2 movies, maybe giving an additional indication that there isn't a one-size-fits-all ghostbusting solution out there for every problem. (I think even one of the unused drafts had something where Vigo's spiritual forces were something different that their traditional methods wouldn't work on.) So I think that maybe lends some support to the idea that as a franchise they might be going on different types of baddies/casts/tactics for each new film. It's not really anything I'm saying they need to do or that I want them to do, but it is an idea that producers might be thinking.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
But with those three, couldn't another issue be that they were all originally R-rated movies? I was trying to think of a good comparision franchise to GB and the closest I can think of might be Bill and Teds. I almost wanted to say Back to the Future, as it is a much 'bigger' film that probably shares a lot more elements with GB. Mad science, comedy, a bit dark at times, impressive effects, cool cars. At the same time I think the fandom accepted the closure of the franchise a long time ago, it had probably better sequels and the nature of the franchise gives them an excuse to remake it with a modern perspective. With Bill and Ted's, they're both Sci-fi comedies, produced a very popular first film and a relatively less-popular sequel. It also has the same years of "Part 3 is going to happen!" chatter that never materialized.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 06:35
|
|
|
If not for the fact that the franchise failed to have a long-lasting popularity, Teen Wolf might be a good comparison to GB, also. It took a traditionally 'horror' concept and made it into a comedy. Both first films were very popular and successful, sequels less so. But much like Ghostbusters, a reimagining with a much different angle was announced and put into production to a skeptical audience a few decades later. People just weren't passionate enough about Teen Wolf to get too excited about MTV ruining it by changing it. But it seems to be doing alright for itself, from what I hear.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
I couldn't get into the Ghostbusters game and I don't really know why. Part of me does remember a proof of concept/demo someone did about 10 years ago for a unproduced Ghostbusters game that I was sort of interested in. It looks like it takes quite a bit of liberties, but I think with some actual input/support from the IP holders it could have maybe been polished into something good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM4cuKgGNvg. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl6KvdTOIjM Admittedly, an unpopular opinion more than likely, but I sort of wished this had come out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:A free-roaming (or almost free-roaming) do-random-jobs in between story missions setup would have been great. Yeah, and maybe this is why I didn't fall in love with the GB-The Game when it came out. A GTA-styled open world with some built-in team-based stuff, maybe, could have really worked out well. Balance it with some 'monthly expenses' things that require simple business sim stuff. PKE meter acts like a GPS in your car, etc. I WANTED to love the XCom game on the 360, but couldn't. However, I wonder if turn based would work well with a GB game. Staging your characters to corral ghosts and another to lay traps, etc..
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
When does something like a spin-off or alternate media adaptation cross over into the realm of 'THIS is core of the franchise'. Cases in point: Stargate was a single film, but to ask a lot of the fans they seem to feel the 'true' Stargate production is the TV series. When you hear talk of a sequel or remake to the theatrical version, it's like there's a sense of "Meh." Sort of the same thing with the Buffyverse where most people just seem to regard the movie as a cult thing that exists, but the REAL Buffy is the TV universe stuff. A lot of what people maybe build a lot of Ghostbusters in their minds, in a certain age bracket, comes from several dozen hours of much continued adventures in that format, along those lines. (Similarly, I think Men in Black was a far better animated series than it was a movie.) BSG I think had a moment where the actress who played Starbuck declared something along the lines of having played Starbuck in more episodes than the other actor in the role, she felt like she'd earned the right to be called the REAL Starbuck. Is it quality, popularity (fandom or mainstream), quantity?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:I really like the new PKE meter? v It's going WAY more towards the Real Ghostbusters design than the original film design. I wonder if this is all going to end up being intentional at this point. It's going to be less 80s Cinematic Ghostbusters reboot and more a live-action reboot following in spirit of the more cartoonish Real Ghostbuster tone. Keeping in mind, no matter how much we talk about how deep and serious that show was, it still had episodes where ghosts were a LOT more goofy in their design than the films, characters dressed up wacky costumes at times, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up even doing a thing where like the Real Ghostbusters cartoon they end up declaring that the GB2016 are the Really REAL Ghostbusters, that inspired a cartoon remake of their adventures called the Real Ghostbusters (that in turn inspired a movie called Ghostbusters... somehow.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 18:08
|
|
v
|
CelticPredator posted:ID42 owns. It's big budget schlock and better than anything Emmerich's done. After I got done seeing ID4-2, I sort of thought that with just a few tweaks it was ALMOST this close to being part one of a Robotech live-action movie franchise.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
Jonas Albrecht posted:Delicious Ghost is what I want on my tombstone. Tombstone Pizza should have made a Marshmallow and Green Olives pizza to celebrate the TMNT/GB crossover comic.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
Gavok posted:One of the creepier episodes of Real Ghostbusters was this one called "The Hole in the Wall Gang" and I can't help but shake the idea that one of the screenwriters was trying to reference it in the climax. The film feels more like a remake of the Real Ghostbusters than the film Ghostbusters, for better or worse. You could even say that the characters themselves sort of more come across as appearing like the animated versions of the characters. I mean, I didn't really like the film as much as other people seem to, but it came off to me as a satire of the original Ghostbusters in the same way that Land of the Lost and Dark Shadows looked like satires of their respective source material in their trailers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
precision posted:I'm confused about the people who are saying that nobody is giving an honest opinion on this movie. If anything, it seems to be getting trashed harder than it merits. In some ways, I think the trashing is just limited to a small circle of critics. Most of the critics I like online seem to 'love it', even if I don't. The thing I find sort of more strange about the criticism/review of the movie are almost exclusively positive towards the film have to mention 'manbabies', 'your ghostbusters still exist/it didn't erase your GB from existence', 'ghostbros', etc. as a very large part of the review of the film. For all the positive reviews I hear, I almost have yet to hear any that feel like they're saying too much about the movie compared to that derail. But, by the same token, there is a lot of negative reviews that also have to point out how 'well, I saw this with women and they didn't like it...', 'all the women I know are misogynists because they hate this movie', etc. I will throw out some other thoughts of mine on the film though. I think it probably needed one less cast member/team member. While Kevin is the only character whose lines seemed to be the only character to get the most laughs, I think he's not really needed and doesn't work. Or you could have probably dropped one of the main female leads. I don't feel like the main four have really good chemistry with one another and I don't know if taking some of the Kevin stuff and giving it to some of the other characters and/or just reducing the female cast to just three and giving those remaining three some more room to be characters is what was missing for me. For example, Holtzman as the oddball wacky scientist could have easily have taken some of the Kevin humor because she's so wacky that her doing the My Cat/Fish Submarine/Glasses Glasses could have worked. Things like that wouldn't have made her character 'stupid' if done right, they could have just accentuated the character's already eccentric personality that she's showing off at every point in the film as a sort of mad genius that they make her out to be. On that subject, the toast at the end doesn't work because the person giving it, at no point, feels like they're repressing or suppressing their emotions in any way in the film. Going back to the original film for a bit, if someone like Egon had given sort of that same toast, it could have had a bit more sincerity to it because this is a character who has been deadpan and sort of cold the entire film letting that bit of their personality crack and try to show some uncomfortable human emotions. To reiterate, this is NOT the worst of this kind of film I've seen, but I don't know exactly where I'd put it on the scale. Because I'd probably rather watch this than MIB2, again. I'd rather watch this more than Hot Tub Time Machine 2 by a longshot. But I'd rather watch HTTM1 more. It's maybe close to Evolution?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 08:49
|
|
|
Ghostbusters 2016 vs Fantastic Four 2015. Maybe it's a good comparison to make between the two films: Science Team Superhero movies. Geniuses who feel they're being disrespected. (GB are treated like jokes for being GB, Reed and friends are treated like jokes for wanting to go into another dimension.) Long-running controversy leading up to release based on casting (Black Johnny Storm, female GB.) Massive changes to the most 'popular' preestablished version of the characters. (Not picking the 'family adventuring era' FF of to build a movie around, not keeping continuity with previous GB franchise.) Much different in tone than films in the franchise that came before them (FF was more horror, dark and action than previous FF films, new GB was more overt action and comedy compared to original GB films) Fans upset on whose vision should be setting the direction of both projects (Marvel should have FF instead of Fox. Aykroyd, Reitman, etc. should have gotten to do another cinematic GB3) Both films build up to similar climaxes and endings. Most reviews seem to be on the extremes of love or hate (with FF, though, mostly hate). JediTalentAgent fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Jul 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:51 |
|
|
Gabriel Pope posted:I honestly haven't seen this with GB This might be where I'm getting confused, though. I was thinking back to mostly commentary from people and the hate on FF15 seemed VERY overwhelming. With GB16, there seems to be a sort of tone of outspoken extremes that feel very visible in the same way. It feels like the same people who were extreme on FF15 are the same extreme on GB16 in one way or another.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2016 00:12
|
|
The extreme reviews are disproportionately outspoken, but most reviews seem to be mixed or neutral.