http://www.moviehole.net/200815796-bill-murray-agrees-to-ghostbusters-3 (http://www.moviehole.net/200815796-bill-murray-agrees-to-ghostbusters-3)
That's f*ing awesome.
That is all.
I love Ghostbusters! I wonder if Sigourney will be in this one?
Not sure. Think the only person you can rule out is Rick Moranis, who's retired from what I can remember.
... Who did he play?
Quote from: Purebreedalien on Oct 01, 2008, 04:10:16 PM
... Who did he play?
Louis Tully
http://blog.ghostbusters.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/ghost3.gif
Oh him, he was funny ;D
Yeah he was.
I'm not sure what I think of the idea of the Ghosbusters 'handing the torch' to a new younger team, which seems to be the consensus on what's going to happen. It's one of those things I can only decide upon seeing it.
Yeah I prefer the real team.
I don`t know of what I think about a new team doing it, but at least there will be at least one more film and I can`t wait.
I hope Sigourney Weaver will be in it, that would be nice ;D
id personally like to see Shia la Beouf (spelling?) play a younger spazzy ghostbuster i think he could be pretty funny, be like kind of a klutz and stuff.
I won't be seeing it. They should stop reviving old franchises. I associate Ghostbusters with the 80s and that's the time period that it's in. You see a modern version and it just doesn't seem right.
Stop digging up the past, come up with some fresh ideas, give us something new.
Quote from: Byohzrd on Oct 04, 2008, 06:47:10 PM
id personally like to see Shia la Beouf
Good Lord no, Shia is pretty much awful.
Unless Spielberg is involved, I doubt LaBeouf would be attached to the film.
I think LeBoooof would be funny in it. He can play the spastic n00b trying to learn the ropes. Steve Carell would be hilarious too. Maybe the duo from Shaun of the Dead as well, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. They can all play the new recruits gettin' schooled by the old cast. :)
What about Nick Cage?
I used to like him, but he's kinda annoying to me now. I'm not sure he'd fit any role too well. He's not that funny, but I know he can have his moments.
I love Bill Murray. I'm still sceptickle if ghostbuters 3 will ever happen. I'll believe it when i see the trailer.
Reviving Ghost Busters with a new squad?... Idk. The original team is a cinema classic, you can't try to out do that with a new team. I'm hesitant when classics tried to be redone.
GREAT NEWS PEOPLE!!!
http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/16251
Sigourney Weaver, Harold Ramis, Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and Rick Moranis are all coming back, as well as a batch of new busters that have yet to be cast. Shooting begins this winter, so things may change till then but so far so good!
This is awesome ;D! I can't wait!
Oh, and for those too lazy to read the article, apparently there are going to be girl busters this time around.
Edgar Wright should totally direct this and have Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. ;D
I guess they convinced Rick Moranis to come out of retirement. On June 24, 2008, Moranis declined to come out of retirement to join the other cast members of Ghostbusters in the production of a new video game based on the films.
Excellent. Fantastic. Awesome. Very good.
Here is a little Video Interview with Harold Ramis about the status of GB 3.
http://www.widescreen-vision.de/aid,689603/Harold-Ramis-redet-ueber-GHOSTBUSTERS-3/News/
I saw that, it was pretty insightful. Only thing I disagreed with was when he said Indy 4 was a disaster... It wasn't as good as the originals, but disaster? I think not. But I digress... The Ghostbusters info was the meat and potatoes.
Dan has been pitching for Eliza Dushku pretty hard.
For what part?
One of the newbies.
Dan wants two guys and two gals.
Maybe Dushku can be Oscar's gal pal :-*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krVXRCcr2M4
GB3 is the DNF (well DNF is dead heh) of movies, it will never ever happen.
DNF isn't dead. It's just in a coma... :(
I dunno.. I wouldn't say never, but it may not be for a while and may not be the sequel we're all hoping for. I suppose at some time or another the name could get used sans everything we love about the originals... I hope not, but seeing how many old franchises are getting revisited, I wouldn't think it's out of the question.
Ghostbusters 3 is bad news for me. 1 & 2 were perfect! I'm not ready for a third.
2 was far from perfect.
Why is there hate for 2? You're right, it's far from perfect, but I can't figure out what's seriously wrong with it.
:(
Quote from: TJ Doc on Nov 24, 2009, 12:04:04 AM
Why is there hate for 2? You're right, it's far from perfect, but I can't figure out what's seriously wrong with it.
:(
I liked #2, although there was a certain feel to it that wasn't right.
How does "it's far from perfect" = "hate"? Seriously are people all neocons who see things in black and white?
Ghostbusters 2 is fun. Peter McNicol was a great addition. But 1) it had a LOT to live up to as the first one is a classic and 2) the whole thing with the Statue of Liberty walking through Manhattan was stupidly over the top even for a comic fantasy.
That 'hate' comment wasn't directed at you, SM, but to the surprisingly large number of people who've written negative reviews for G2. But still, good word: 'neocon' (adds to lexicon).
A-nyway, I quite liked the Statue of Liberty scenes. I suppose the main problem I had with the film was its anticlimax. Boo.
GB2 doesn't have a patch on the original but its still a good movie, also it was the first film i ever saw in a Cinema so it does hold a certain amount of Nostalgia value for me. :)
I like Ghostbusters 2.
Id love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters. Yes the originals are great.
But the story, imagine that if it were done seriously. Guys that go visit f**ked up haunted places huntin ghosts down. Could be a good horror movie :)
Quote from: Cellien on Oct 07, 2008, 03:06:15 PM
I think LeBoooof would be funny in it. He can play the spastic n00b trying to learn the ropes. Steve Carell would be hilarious too. Maybe the duo from Shaun of the Dead as well, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. They can all play the new recruits gettin' schooled by the old cast. :)
._.
Are you f**king serious?
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Mm hm, Ghostbusters terrified me as a sprog. :-\
That damn library ghost. D:
Quote from: Huol on Nov 25, 2009, 10:58:41 PM
That damn library ghost. D:
Aha, that part scared the shit out of me.
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
If you like serious movies, how do you like Ghostbusters?
He skips the funny bits. Makes the running time about 90% shorter.
Quote from: predalien27 on Nov 26, 2009, 12:48:18 AM
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
If you like serious movies, how do you like Ghostbusters?
Quote from: predalien27 on Nov 26, 2009, 12:48:18 AM
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
If you like serious movies, how do you like Ghostbusters?
The power of the 1980s my friend, the power of the 1980s. Its the same way i like Huey Lewis and the News. Its just got that 80s feel that makes it special.
Let me rephrase. When it comes to films with a good plot, or wicked action. I prefer it to be serious.
However films that are just daft, like The Blues Brothers, The Mask, or the intentional cheese b-movie appeal of From Dusk Till Dawn and Planet Horror. Im cool with.
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:49:51 AM
Quote from: predalien27 on Nov 26, 2009, 12:48:18 AM
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
If you like serious movies, how do you like Ghostbusters?
Quote from: predalien27 on Nov 26, 2009, 12:48:18 AM
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:45:47 AM
Quote from: SM on Nov 25, 2009, 10:44:01 PM
QuoteId love to see a serious adaptation of Ghostbusters.
Why? Ghostbusters had the right amount of seriousness to make the ghosts/ Gozer a threat. More than that and it'd lose the integral humour.
Cause im not really a fan of comedy. I like seriousnessnessness in movies...most of the time.
minus fun cheesy stuff like Lethal Weapon, or dark humour like American Psycho had.
If you like serious movies, how do you like Ghostbusters?
The power of the 1980s my friend, the power of the 1980s. Its the same way i like Huey Lewis and the News. Its just got that 80s feel that makes it special.
I know how you feel.
Its like.
Arnie and Stallones action movies, especially the 1980s ones. If those type of films were done now, theyd be shitty like Resident Evil 3. Theres just something about those old classics that just has SOMETHING which you just think "yeah, thats awesome".
Happens with many films. I recently bought a film called Wall Street. Its just got that typical 1980s Michael Douglas feel, and i love films filmed in New York. Mix that with 80s and you have a film i like for the scenes alone. Although the film is pretty decent plot wise.
Quote from: mrlee on Nov 26, 2009, 12:49:51 AM
The power of the 1980s my friend, the power of the 1980s. Its the same way i like Huey Lewis and the News. Its just got that 80s feel that makes it special.
I like you! I
really like you!
Let's celebrate! ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIkOVe0MF1k
Seriously, where do you find this stuff? It's like listening to the Devil scratching his nails on a chalkboard... IN HELL!
No way! Huey Lewis and the News is quite possibly the best thing ever! Since EVER!
Observe!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDc6S330otc
AAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!! NO MORE! NO MORE! PLEASE, I BEG OF YOU, NO MORE!!! What do you want? Do you want money? Your head back? Please, for the love of God, just MAKE IT STOP!!! :'(
But I already healed my head with my new-found light side Scanner abilities! I'm more powerful than you could possibly imagine...
BEHOLD MY TRUE POWER!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB5YkmjalDg
Oh my god-it's full of horrible! Need something... power draining...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB4Hkem_OyE
Oh, thank merciful Jesus!
Ah! Cream!
How very... smooth. Reminds me of -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKxiLCMb6Q4
Ahhhhhhh...
Finally, something good!
Quote from: SpaceMarines on Nov 26, 2009, 01:29:39 AM
AAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!! NO MORE! NO MORE! PLEASE, I BEG OF YOU, NO MORE!!! What do you want? Do you want money? Your head back? Please, for the love of God, just MAKE IT STOP!!! :'(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwicLgOGJOI
That was the perfect use of that song.
Huey Lewis And the News are great!! Big fun 80s pop rock!
Tracks like "I Know What i Like" "I Want a New Drug" "Power of Love"
Power of Love is in Back to the Future, thats cool enough. N you wouldnt have your Ghostbusters theme if it wasnt for i want a new drug, cause the guy ripped the song off, he even got sued for it.
80s music rules! Practically almost all 80s is awesome.
Glam Metal: Motley Crue, Cinderella, Skid Row
Thrash Metal: Anthrax, Slayer, Megadeth
New Wave:Duran Duran, The Fixx, Japan
Hard Rock: Guns N Roses, The Cult, Janes Addiction
Soft Rock:Huey Lewis and the News, INXS
Goth: Sisters of Mercy, The Cure (sort of)
N other stuff like Tears For Fears, Echo and the Bunnymen.
Its one f**kin awesome decade for tunes dudes! So much from that decade.
The 70s and the 60s were better.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftcbmag.blogs.com%2Fdebatable%2Fimages%2FDebatableLeft.jpg&hash=36adcf9835d38fbdb3ed0badc83c33076495b058)
I know, I know. I'm stating my opinion as fact. I'm sorry TJ. Well, to get back on track, I want there to be a third film for nostalgic purposes, even though I will most likely be thoroughly disappointing.
P.S. *liver with fava beans and a nice chianti *hiss**
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=61915
Ghostbusters 2011?
ZOMG!!! 8)
One can only hope.
Won't believe till i see a Teaser trailer at least, for me GB3 is the DNF of the movie industry.
Quote from: Harvey Weinstein on Oct 02, 2008, 02:54:14 PM
Yeah he was.
I'm not sure what I think of the idea of the Ghosbusters 'handing the torch' to a new younger team, which seems to be the consensus on what's going to happen. It's one of those things I can only decide upon seeing it.
Ever watched Extreme Ghostbusters
^^ Yeah its not the first time that subject has been touched upon in the GB universe.
Reitman Confirms He Will Direct Ghostbusters 3
Speaking to MTV, Ivan Reitman confirmed he will return to direct Ghostbusters 3. Reitman directed the first two films, which were released in 1984 and 1989.
Reitman said that screenwriters Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky had turned in a first draft of the script and are working on a second draft right now. "Good work is being done and all of us have our fingers crossed... There's some very cool things in the new draft," he said.
While he wouldn't comment on recent rumors about the story, he added that he hopes to start shooting in this next year.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=62369 (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=62369)
Awesome. Nothing terrible can come of this.
Mediocre? Perhaps.
Im just psyched it isnt another f*cking remake.
Quote from: Undeadite on Jan 13, 2010, 06:55:02 PM
Im just psyched it isnt another f*cking remake.
Amen
I cannot wait. I'm going to go freeze myself in the Albertan Rockies. See you in 2011!
But you'll miss the Egon Rave (http://egonrave.ytmnd.com/)!
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jan 14, 2010, 03:38:17 PM
But you'll miss the Egon Rave (http://egonrave.ytmnd.com/)!
Wow...
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jan 14, 2010, 03:38:17 PM
But you'll miss the Egon Rave (http://egonrave.ytmnd.com/)!
Noooo!!! I can't miss that! Okay, I won't freeze myself.
Can you say, Ghostbusters 3D?! ;D
http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/18802
Nice. :)
:-\
But I suppose if they do go to hell in this one then it could look quite spectacular.
Are you unhappy with them making a new movie or that it's in 3D?
It's the 3D thing.
Whenever I hear about an upcoming (which I'm looking forward to) film that's having it implemented, I always get worried about that being where all the effort is put into.
I just don't want it to overshadow the rest of the film.
Borrowing from Latin, VADE RETRO 3d. >:(
I say, why the sequel hasn't been made before? Seriously, a sequel in 2010-2011 for a franchise that is an icon of the 80's? ::)
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jan 22, 2010, 07:23:38 PM
It's the 3D thing.
Whenever I hear about an upcoming (which I'm looking forward to) film that's having it implemented, I always get worried about that being where all the effort is put into.
I just don't want it to overshadow the rest of the film.
I think Avatar has shown that what you require is definitely possible.
This better not be like Indy 4 again.
I honestly don't believe I could live through another experience like Indy 4. :'(
Quote from: Cellien on Jan 22, 2010, 09:20:03 PM
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jan 22, 2010, 07:23:38 PM
It's the 3D thing.
Whenever I hear about an upcoming (which I'm looking forward to) film that's having it implemented, I always get worried about that being where all the effort is put into.
I just don't want it to overshadow the rest of the film.
I think Avatar has shown that what you require is definitely possible.
Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll... maybe.
Yes... maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybeeeeeeeeeeee. :)
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jan 22, 2010, 09:26:29 PM
I honestly don't believe I could live through another experience like Indy 4. :'(
If I had been sober when I watched it, I would have killed myself on the spot.
And yes there's bound to be some apprehension when 3D is added to the mix, but with the creative team on board I'm not worried. I REALLY wanna see some ghosts all up in my face. ;D
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Jan 22, 2010, 07:26:54 PM
I say, why the sequel hasn't been made before? Seriously, a sequel in 2010-2011 for a franchise that is an icon of the 80's? ::)
Ladies and gentlemen, let me point out here the sad mentality of the new millennium. ;)
3-D? I guess that could be kinda neat... :-\
Quote from: SpaceMarines on Jan 23, 2010, 12:45:23 AM
3-D? I guess that could be kinda neat... :-\
If they kept the style of the ghosts (big creepy puppet looking things) then I would be happy with 3D.
Quote from: Undeadite on Jan 23, 2010, 12:04:25 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, let me point out here the sad mentality of the new millennium. ;)
Um, were you referring to the sequel being made now?
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Jan 23, 2010, 12:46:15 PM
Quote from: Undeadite on Jan 23, 2010, 12:04:25 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, let me point out here the sad mentality of the new millennium. ;)
Um, were you referring to the sequel being made now?
No, I was referring to your opinion that it isn't worth making a sequel at all.
I would have preferred a sequel before now.
I don't really like the fact that some sequels/prequels come out from 10 and beyond years after the originals.
The Prequel of The Thing, Lake Placid 2, and stuff.
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Jan 23, 2010, 04:52:07 PM
I would have preferred a sequel before now.
I don't really like the fact that some sequels/prequels come out from 10 and beyond years after the originals.
The Prequel of The Thing, Lake Placid 2, and stuff.
Don't forget to add Alien! ;D
Photos: Jonah Hill, Kristen Bell and Sarah Paxton Spread "Ghostbusters 3" Rumors
A few days ago, Jonah Hill and Kristen Bell posted photos of themselves on Twitter with an Ecto-1, the car used in the "Ghostbusters" movies. Now, actress Sarah Paxton added herself to the group, by posting a similar photo.
Hill wrote: "Who ya gonna call?" Paxton wrote: "Who ya gonna call? SARAH PAXTON!" And Bell wrote: "Guys, please do not be intimidated that I changed my background to a pic of me driving the Ecto-1. It's not a big thang. (read: It's a BIG thang)"
Looking at all the pictures, it seems that the Ecto-1 is in the same spot and there is another movie-car next to it. While Hill was once rumored to join the cast of "Ghostbusters 3," I'll quicker believe that this is for some charity. Stay tuned.
Question: If this is the studio's way to announce the cast, what do you think of Hill, Bell and Paxton starring in the third installment?
Read more: http://worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=23981&count=0#ixzz1lKuffTla (http://worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=23981&count=0#ixzz1lKuffTla)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fworstpreviews.com%2Fimages%2Fheadlines%2Ftemp%2Ftemp3216.jpg&hash=ef45a48c88cd941701aa35f5e4de4aa88ee3f335)
Jonah Hill in GH3?
No thanks.
Do not want.
Jonah hill is so annoying, damnnn ittttt
There's nothing I hate more than this stupid idea that we need "new hip younger Ghostbusters" in GB3. You do that and its no longer Ghostbusters. GB works because of the original cast! Its just like what they are doing with the Evil Dead remake. I hate junk like this. STOP SHOVING YOUR IDEAS OF HIP YOUNGER MORE RELATABLE STARS DOWN MY THROAT HOLLYWOOD!
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com%2Fslashfilm%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fimages%2FZZ74737887.jpg&hash=a2948c89834a2706e7830a366b60ce8f65bf9b7e)
It's always Yes or No from Bill Murray, he cannot make up his mind if he wants Ghostbusters 3 made.
He has made up his mind. He doesnt want to do it, end of story. There aint gonna be a Ghostbusters 3 and if there is, its not going to be with the original cast, or all of them anyway. Leave it alone I say. A few years ago if everybody had agreed then id have went for it, but theres been too much pissing about. We got a part three with the game anyway and it was great.
Quote from: Keg on Apr 06, 2012, 05:01:47 PM
He has made up his mind. He doesnt want to do it, end of story. There aint gonna be a Ghostbusters 3 and if there is, its not going to be with the original cast, or all of them anyway. Leave it alone I say. A few years ago if everybody had agreed then id have went for it, but theres been too much pissing about. We got a part three with the game anyway and it was great.
Part 3 being a video game, I remember Dan Aykroyd said, "This is essentially the third movie."
How can the game count as a movie?.
It can't count as a movie obviously, but its a direct sequel to the events of the first 2 films, with the plot even linked in to the first film quite alot.
It just so happens that this story was told in videogame form and not in a movie. After playing the game and seeing how good it turned out i'd welcome a CGI film, that way all the actors can look like they did back then, and it would be alot easier to get them to voice the characters rather than actually play them in a live action film.
Then again it would look so drastically different from the originals that I dont think they could pull that off either.
Maybe the Idea of Ghostbusters 3 could become a reboot or a remake.
Quote from: mastermoon on Apr 06, 2012, 05:23:28 PM
Maybe the Idea of Ghostbusters 3 could become a reboot or a remake.
Straight in the childhood.
Quote from: ace3g on Apr 06, 2012, 03:05:30 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbitcast-a-sm.bitgravity.com%2Fslashfilm%2Fwp%2Fwp-content%2Fimages%2FZZ74737887.jpg&hash=a2948c89834a2706e7830a366b60ce8f65bf9b7e)
The next best thing. If Murray won't do it, I have no problem with Shat taking his place. :D
He better get a musical number, then.
They should all just get together for another game. The first one sold pretty well, too.
Asked about GB3 at 2:05 mark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rsemDios52o#t=125s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rsemDios52o#t=125s)
Bill Murray needs to make up his mind, how many times does he have to say "Yes it will happen" or "No it will not happen".
It's just safe to say Ghostbusters 3 will never make it and stay in development hell.
I think they have left it too long, these guys are OLD! and no one can replace them, a moment in history folks.
Production is moving forward without Murray.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983)
That's upsetting. I really hope that this s good, if its ever released...
Someone's really gotta change the title of this thread.
Quote from: Laufey on Aug 02, 2012, 01:05:08 PM
Production is moving forward without Murray.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983)
Aaaand my care has dropped below the sustainable level.
LOL, no Murray. f**k this shit.
INB4 "inacurate thread title".
Quote from: Hubbs on Jun 11, 2012, 01:45:31 AM
I think they have left it too long, these guys are OLD! and no one can replace them, a moment in history folks.
Sums up my feelings tbh, Ghostbusters has been my favorite film ever since I was a kid and it just won't be the same. I cant see anyone playing off each other like the first film plus having new and old Ghostbusters would just be too much to cram in for me.
Wouldn't have minded a computer generated film lie they did with resident evil tho.
No Murray, no movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8g2Gk-nwrE#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8g2Gk-nwrE#ws)
LOL, the f**k.
thats awesome !! :laugh:
Quote from: Space Sweeper on Aug 02, 2012, 04:20:09 PM
Quote from: Laufey on Aug 02, 2012, 01:05:08 PM
Production is moving forward without Murray.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=64983)
Aaaand my care has dropped below the sustainable level.
Yep. They might as well make a live action version of "The Real Ghostbusters" now. Cut there losses and just recast the whole film. Otherwise it will feel TOO much like a sad attempt at making cash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxMrVQJnedg#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxMrVQJnedg#ws)
No Murray? No deal.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/L3VITIKUZ293/news/?a=67829 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/L3VITIKUZ293/news/?a=67829)
Ehhh....
Nehhhh...
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=97755&utm_campaign=facebookfan&utm_source=facebookfan&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=web_app (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=97755&utm_campaign=facebookfan&utm_source=facebookfan&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=web_app)
Ehhh... Just confirm or kill the movie already.
This might turn out to be another Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Took years in development only to disappoint fans when released.
Quote from: Rick Grimes on Dec 06, 2012, 02:29:15 AM
This might turn out to be another Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Took years in development only to disappoint fans when released.
Some fans. Granted, I didn't get into Indiana Jones until just before KotCS came out, but I quite enjoyed it. Was it as good as the originals? No, but its also far from the mess that its made out to be.
I just wish they cast someone else as Indy's son... Shia wasn't terrible, but he's far from my first choice.
I have a feeling it's going to be another KOTCS type of movie as well. I think they still want this movie out by 2014 for the 30th anniversary of Ghostbusters. I guess they might release it around Halloween time which could work.
If they wanted it to be released by 2014, they'd already be working on it by now, or getting started very soon. Its not even green lit yet. I'd say, if this ever even happens, 2015 will be the earliest we'll see it.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Dec 06, 2012, 02:33:16 AM
Quote from: Rick Grimes on Dec 06, 2012, 02:29:15 AM
This might turn out to be another Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Took years in development only to disappoint fans when released.
Some fans. Granted, I didn't get into Indiana Jones until just before KotCS came out, but I quite enjoyed it. Was it as good as the originals? No, but its also far from the mess that its made out to be.
I just wish they cast someone else as Indy's son... Shia wasn't terrible, but he's far from my first choice.
I enjoyed it too. It's a good movie that does have seeable flaws. But I like it. Except for Shia.
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/12/11/seth-rogen-jack-black-rainn-wilson-ghostbusters-reitman/ (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/12/11/seth-rogen-jack-black-rainn-wilson-ghostbusters-reitman/)
I like Indiana Jones 4 too. Except for the usual 'hey, this actor does not come back so we get rid of the character offscreen. Best resolution!' kind of thing.
Reminds me of one of the newer Hey Ash episodes.
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/rvyecu/hey-ash--whatcha-playin---indiana-jones (http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/rvyecu/hey-ash--whatcha-playin---indiana-jones)
If Sony doesn't make a move quick, Aykroyd is out.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/zombiegeddon/news/?a=71457 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/zombiegeddon/news/?a=71457)
I agree with him completely; this back and forth stuff is getting sickening. Either make the movie or don't.
Can't really blame him.
I just hope they don't use the ideas they threw up list time, IIRC writers wanted the original Ghostbusters to be retired, one of them lost an eye and wearing an eyepatch, and so... It would be insulting for me making a new Ghostbusters film only to see our favorite characters in decadence >:(
I really have no hope for this film to come, kinda feel bad for Aykroyd.
To be honest this is a film that should've been made at least a decade ago if not further back. :-\
Bill Murray Said to be Finally Contemplating GB3 with Cohen Script
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/?a=75376#55GcjliqrA6ZySGd.99 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/news/?a=75376#55GcjliqrA6ZySGd.99)
Would be funny if Jason Reitman ended up writing the script for his dad.
'Ghostbusters 3' should begin filming next year, says Dan Aykroyd
http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/ghostbusters-3-should-begin-filming-next-year-says/306577#PH9ZPWql8YWuQ4KZ.99 (http://www.nme.com/filmandtv/news/ghostbusters-3-should-begin-filming-next-year-says/306577#PH9ZPWql8YWuQ4KZ.99)
"But Bill Murray won't be back as Dr Peter Venkman"
Whelp. Will not watch.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 08:34:33 PM
"But Bill Murray won't be back as Dr Peter Venkman"
I'll be keeping my money then.
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F25.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_md59uaD41M1rwmyy6o1_500.jpg&hash=94f80b2d7baeb3d97d903c2b9f5079f0e69e5860)
If they get a new younger bunch to take on the mantle from the old bunch, this is who I think could work :)
Obviously the characters don't have to be exact copies of the original film characters, nor do you have to have a black character to replace 'Zeddmore'. But I have sorta divided them into what type of person they would be, but that's just how I see them in their roles.
1. Luke Wilson: ladies man/charmer
2. Seth Rogen: tubby 'Ray Stantz-like' one
3. Michael Cera: soft spoken/wimpy/scared one
4. Ken Jeong: brainy/gadget one
I do think the cast would need to be smaller names rather than huge stars, but known stars of course. Off the wall type guys mixed with a sense of black humour and decent sarcasm.
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 26, 2013, 08:52:41 PM
1. Luke Wilson: ladies man/charmer
2. Seth Rogen: tubby 'Ray Stantz-like' one
3. Michael Cera: soft spoken/wimpy/scared one
4. Ken Jeong: brainy/gadget one
And they should get Apatow to direct! And Rogen can do screenplay rewrites! And James Franco and Jonah Hill can turn up as ghosts or something!
If they absolutely have to introduce a new group of Ghostbusters, I'm just going to say the same two names I've been saying for the past couple years or so: Sam Rockwell and Nathan Fillion.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 09:01:23 PM
If they absolutely have to introduce a new group of Ghostbusters, I'm just going to say the same two names I've been saying for the past couple years or so: Sam Rockwell and Nathan Fillion.
Possibly. But only if he's from a different chapter or something.
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 26, 2013, 09:00:15 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 26, 2013, 08:52:41 PM
1. Luke Wilson: ladies man/charmer
2. Seth Rogen: tubby 'Ray Stantz-like' one
3. Michael Cera: soft spoken/wimpy/scared one
4. Ken Jeong: brainy/gadget one
And they should get Apatow to direct! And Rogen can do screenplay rewrites! And James Franco and Jonah Hill can turn up as ghosts or something!
Cvalda's sarcastic proposal would make the studio more money at least.
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Apr 26, 2013, 09:06:24 PM
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 26, 2013, 09:00:15 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 26, 2013, 08:52:41 PM
1. Luke Wilson: ladies man/charmer
2. Seth Rogen: tubby 'Ray Stantz-like' one
3. Michael Cera: soft spoken/wimpy/scared one
4. Ken Jeong: brainy/gadget one
And they should get Apatow to direct! And Rogen can do screenplay rewrites! And James Franco and Jonah Hill can turn up as ghosts or something!
Cvalda's sarcastic proposal would make the studio more money at least.
...but it is a comedy... so... :P
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 08:34:33 PM
'Ghostbusters 3' should begin filming next year, says Dan Aykroyd
"pulls the zipper down".
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 08:34:33 PM"But Bill Murray won't be back as Dr Peter Venkman"
"pulls the zipper back right up."
...well.. that was anti-climatic. :P
Its a very hard casting choice to make but you can't have people that are too mainstream of too big. Rockwell is too big if you ask me, plus his style of humour might be too adult for this franchise, can't be saying 'motherf**ker' hehe. Plus he's too good looking methinks.
Jonah Hill...that could work :) dry wry humour, funny appearance etc...
Rockwell was able to do a more family friendly type of humor in Iron Man 2, and he was one of the best parts of that film.
Rockwell just needs to be in everything.
I prefer a new young cast.
Quote from: Aspie on Apr 26, 2013, 11:34:17 PM
I prefer a new young cast.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F400x%2F23561934.jpg&hash=71d3a32cbb693b0c11bf9c62cb46318e1a856219)
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 11:35:15 PM
Quote from: Aspie on Apr 26, 2013, 11:34:17 PM
I prefer a new young cast.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.memegenerator.net%2Finstances%2F400x%2F23561934.jpg&hash=71d3a32cbb693b0c11bf9c62cb46318e1a856219)
Oh Hell to the no...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc5OZVvD4Jo# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fc5OZVvD4Jo#)
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 26, 2013, 09:32:16 PM
Rockwell was able to do a more family friendly type of humor in Iron Man 2, and he was one of the best parts of that film.
I point you in the direction of Galaxy Quest. Rockwell was the best damn thing about that movie by miles.
"Is there air? We dont know? hhhhhhhhhhhhhhmpffff...................."
Its been so long since I've seen Galaxy Quest, long before I even knew who Sam Rockwell was...
I need to get my hands on that movie again. I remember really enjoying it, but don't remember much about it.
Rockwell lived up to his last name in Galaxy Quest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mXWXwxPtXg#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mXWXwxPtXg#ws)
Nah Galaxy Quest's best player was Rickman come on.
Hahaha the look on his face when he steps off the ship. "Anooooooother Shipmate". Pahahahahaha
Nathan Fillion, Clark Greg, Sam Rockwell, and Katee Sackhoff as the new Ghostbusters.
Fund it now.
A female member??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINQbNxRz-c#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINQbNxRz-c#ws)
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 27, 2013, 05:22:09 PM
Nathan Fillion, Clark Greg, Sam Rockwell, and Katee Sackhoff as the new Ghostbusters.
Fund it now.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Freplygif.net%2Fi%2F272.gif&hash=3c66c18cb50f5b23c5ac638676de861fca221e74)
You like Firefly, right Aspie? Any particular reason you can't see Fillion donning the proton pack?
I could see either him or Alan Tudyk really working in this type of role.
Aspie wants Shia Laboeuf to play Iron Man in Robert Downey Jr.'s stead.
He has no credibility.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 27, 2013, 06:12:13 PM
You like Firefly, right Aspie? Any particular reason you can't see Fillion donning the proton pack?
I could see either him or Alan Tudyk really working in this type of role.
Firefly was good. A bit overrated amongst fans, but it was okay.
I love me some Fillion, but a younger Ghost Buster group just seems more exciting to me. He can be a mentor/villain/ally or something, but my heart is set on a younger group of ghost hunters.
As for Clark Gregg...well, he just doesn't belong in movies in general.
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 27, 2013, 05:29:51 PM
A female member??
MALE SUPERIORITY IS BEING CHALLENGED!!!!!!
:laugh:
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 27, 2013, 05:22:09 PM
Nathan Fillion, Clark Greg, Sam Rockwell, and Katee Sackhoff as the new Ghostbusters.
Fund it now.
ALL MY MONEY.
You can't have Fillion as a Ghostbuster!! this is suppose to be a bunch of quirky, wacky, regular Joe oddballs that don't look like movie stars, they look like blue collar workers doing a mundane job. Fillion is a good looking heroic young Han Solo type guy, that's not the type of guy for this film jesus!. Its not about good looking buff blokes running around with gleaming white teeth and being generally superheroic, may as well cast Cruise, Pitt, Depp and Clooney if you want that. Glad some of you don't make big decisions ::)
Same goes for having a female member, that would inevitably bring along the cliched sexy Ghostbuster angle with tight outfits and lame feminist gags. Plus you know they would use someone like Megan Fox to attract all the teen males.
Maybe have a female join the regular four during the film as a recruit which two of the team have reservations about...kind thing, but not one of the four.
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 27, 2013, 08:19:39 PM
You can't have Fillion as a Ghostbuster!! this is suppose to be a bunch of quirky, wacky, regular Joe oddballs, mainly for the funny men of film. Fillion is a good looking heroic young Han Solo type guy, that's not the type of guy for this role jesus!. Glad some of you don't make big decisions ::)
Fillion
played a Han Solo-esque character. He himself
isn't a Han Solo-esque character.
I can certainly see him doing this kind of role. He has great comedic timing, a similar dry wit shared by the actors in the original film, and just seems like he'd look right in the role. But that's just me; not gonna force my opinions on anyone.
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 27, 2013, 08:19:39 PM
Same goes for having a female member, that would inevitably bring along the cliched sexy Ghostbuster angle with tight outfits and lame feminist gags.
Or it would mean that one that *gasp* of the members is a female! :o
Winston was black in the first movie...does that mean that the film was full of African American-centric stereotypes and gags?
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 27, 2013, 08:25:41 PM
Fillion played a Han Solo-esque character. He himself isn't a Han Solo-esque character.
But he is sex on two legs.
I just think a female character would be lame, simple. Its suppose to be four blokes living in a firehouse and just being like four working blokes, having female in there would bring up some interesting moments but change the feel of the film totally.
Fillion looks pretty Solo-esque to me.
Quote from: TJ Doc on Apr 27, 2013, 08:27:23 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Apr 27, 2013, 08:25:41 PM
Fillion played a Han Solo-esque character. He himself isn't a Han Solo-esque character.
But he is sex on two legs.
And that's exactly what you DON'T want for this type of film ::)
The only good move for the franchise now is to make the Ghostbuster crew younger. Keep Fillion away from a proton pack.
And Fillion is extremely Solo-esque lol.
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 27, 2013, 08:29:34 PM
Quote from: TJ Doc on Apr 27, 2013, 08:27:23 PM
But he is sex on two legs.
And that's exactly what you DON'T want for this type of film ::)
My point exactly. I'd much prefer to see another group of Average Joes strap on the proton packs.
With plenty of homoeroticism between them.
Yes exactly, Fillion doesn't fit that type of role. Not sure about the homoerotic bit though.
Four guys alone together in a converted fire station 24/7?
Anything could happen.
Quote from: TJ Doc on Apr 27, 2013, 08:45:24 PM
Four guys alone together in a converted fire station 24/7?
Anything could happen.
You're scaring me ???
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinema52.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F01%2FGhostjob.jpg&hash=909c1e8527e08a4996688774dfd0bd0f0aab939b)
Quote from: TJ Doc on Apr 27, 2013, 09:02:40 PM
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cinema52.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F01%2FGhostjob.jpg&hash=909c1e8527e08a4996688774dfd0bd0f0aab939b)
hehe that sequence was always cut when shown on TV when I was a kid. Brilliant bit though :laugh:
Quote from: Hubbs on Apr 27, 2013, 08:19:39 PM
You can't have Fillion as a Ghostbuster!! this is suppose to be a bunch of quirky, wacky, regular Joe oddballs that don't look like movie stars, they look like blue collar workers doing a mundane job. Fillion is a good looking heroic young Han Solo type guy, that's not the type of guy for this film jesus!. Its not about good looking buff blokes running around with gleaming white teeth and being generally superheroic, may as well cast Cruise, Pitt, Depp and Clooney if you want that. Glad some of you don't make big decisions ::)
Same goes for having a female member, that would inevitably bring along the cliched sexy Ghostbuster angle with tight outfits and lame feminist gags. Plus you know they would use someone like Megan Fox to attract all the teen males.
Maybe have a female join the regular four during the film as a recruit which two of the team have reservations about...kind thing, but not one of the four.
THIS. Love Fillion, but he'd be a terrible choice as a GB. Well, not terrible. I can kinda see it. But it wouldn't feel right.
If the newer Ghost Busters aren't youngsters, I would like to see Rainn Wilson as one. It's kind of hard to picture him out of his Dwight role, but I know he could make a great character in this franchise.
Rainn Wilson...that's a good call :) I could see that.
Why not a Ghostbusters x Portal crossover?
Not exactly GB related but....
http://www.vulture.com/2013/05/rick-moranis-return.html (http://www.vulture.com/2013/05/rick-moranis-return.html)
If he truly is back to stay and this movie does wind up happening his return is a must.
Quote from: ace3g on May 09, 2013, 04:14:55 PM
Not exactly GB related but....
http://www.vulture.com/2013/05/rick-moranis-return.html (http://www.vulture.com/2013/05/rick-moranis-return.html)
YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!
Danny McBride has to be in this.
That is all.
Quote from: Keg on May 09, 2013, 07:39:42 PM
Danny McBride has to be in this.
That is all.
Hell yes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdueGUDmr0o#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdueGUDmr0o#ws)
http://www.firstshowing.net/2013/watch-indie-doc-spook-central-dives-very-deep-into-ghostbusters/?uid=97db95194a888db772c73de0c0a408da0dcbbd73 (http://www.firstshowing.net/2013/watch-indie-doc-spook-central-dives-very-deep-into-ghostbusters/?uid=97db95194a888db772c73de0c0a408da0dcbbd73)
Fillion, I could buy as a Venkman-esque character. I stress esque, however, because a lot of that character's charm was the Sigourney-ad-libbed line of him seeming like a game show host. He's slick and sleazy, but with the lazy charisma to make up for it. Fillion's too handsome for that.
And while I don't have any problems with female characters in the mix, they'd have to be like Janine. Someone who isn't an obvious sex symbol. Or else, you just wonder why there isn't a ton of sexual tension/frustration going on with her male colleagues.
Or maybe have a female character as the Venkman role, which would be interesting. Someone with a Janeane Garofalo or Sarah Silverman sort of personality, who's in charge of the group. But as I say, if she has sex symbol looks, like Megan Fox, the sexual tension stuff would creep in. A big part of what made the Ghostbusters dynamic work is that they're like a brotherhood. A fraternity. You need a sibling-like feel for the characters and anything along the lines of sexual attraction is going to screw around with that (no pun intended).
The game which came out on PC totally kicked all kinds of ass, though. I fell in love with that thing and the story was great. All the Ivo Shandor stuff, especially and having the original cast voicing it just made the entire thing perfect.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Jun 11, 2013, 02:06:15 AM
Fillion, I could buy as a Venkman-esque character. I stress esque, however, because a lot of that character's charm was the Sigourney-ad-libbed line of him seeming like a game show host. He's slick and sleazy, but with the lazy charisma to make up for it. Fillion's too handsome for that.
And while I don't have any problems with female characters in the mix, they'd have to be like Janine. Someone who isn't an obvious sex symbol. Or else, you just wonder why there isn't a ton of sexual tension/frustration going on with her male colleagues.
Or maybe have a female character as the Venkman role, which would be interesting. Someone with a Janeane Garofalo or Sarah Silverman sort of personality, who's in charge of the group. But as I say, if she has sex symbol looks, like Megan Fox, the sexual tension stuff would creep in. A big part of what made the Ghostbusters dynamic work is that they're like a brotherhood. A fraternity. You need a sibling-like feel for the characters and anything along the lines of sexual attraction is going to screw around with that (no pun intended).
The game which came out on PC totally kicked all kinds of ass, though. I fell in love with that thing and the story was great. All the Ivo Shandor stuff, especially and having the original cast voicing it just made the entire thing perfect.
Really well said! I'm weary of the idea of a female GB mainly cause when ever you see most people talk about future GB films an teams they say just throw in a hot girl. I hate that. Any one read the ongoing series from IDW? Really great stuff. However they have replaced the original GB team with Jamie and 3 other new characters.
No girls please.
Ghostbuster was all male, deadpan, FTW
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 16, 2013, 01:42:56 AM
No girls please.
Ghostbuster was all male, deadpan, FTW
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview2%2F1146162%2Fscrubs-chicken-o.gif&hash=f940cff75527bb1c506cb6ee0139ea31a22ac9ec)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.bloody-disgusting.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2Fghostbusters.jpg&hash=a5187c0ca7f86c6bd4f6d993712d3572e52b8d19)
http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3243452/random-cool-incredible-ghostbusters-limited-edition-print/ (http://bloody-disgusting.com/news/3243452/random-cool-incredible-ghostbusters-limited-edition-print/)
The artist really captured the essence of Stay Puft's rape face.
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jul 17, 2013, 11:36:55 PM
The artist really captured the essence of Stay Puft's rape face.
You see the way he's staring at Bill Murray?
I think Mr. Stay Puft there has a contract in his pocket for him to sign.
Eww.
...
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wolfgnards.com%2Fmedia%2Fblogs%2Fphotos%2Fcelebrities%2Fgb-marshmallow.jpg&hash=3751c6c51904c013f54c7d71d2af006e952b7d8e)
eeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwww
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi959.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fae77%2Fproject412%2FUntitled_zps5c6d080c.png%3Ft%3D1374283036&hash=29ab6316d254f4595d8964441750c23ce3f8d318)
It's okay... I didn't want to sleep tonight anyway.
Quote from: TJ Doc on Jul 20, 2013, 01:21:18 AM
It's okay... I didn't want to sleep tonight anyway.
No matter. Mr Stay-Puft prefers a struggle.
http://schmoesknow.com/jonah-hill-and-emma-stone-aint-afraid-of-no-ghosts-ghostbusters-3-developments/ (http://schmoesknow.com/jonah-hill-and-emma-stone-aint-afraid-of-no-ghosts-ghostbusters-3-developments/)
Huh... I love me some Emma Stone, but I don't know if I can see Jonah Hill as a Ghostbuster.
Not that I really believe this movie is going to happen anyways.
Just cancel this.
With Harold Ramis' death I think that's wise. I don't want to see any Ghostbusters film without the original actors. However I would recommend that anyone wishing for some more GB stuff to check out the IDW ongoing series. Awesome stuff.
'Ghostbusters III' Script to Be Reworked Following Harold Ramis' Death
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ghostbusters-iii-script-be-reworked-683518?mobile_redirect=false#!/entry/view/id/43967 (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ghostbusters-iii-script-be-reworked-683518?mobile_redirect=false#!/entry/view/id/43967)
At this point, unless it is something that Ramis and everyone else were and still are truly passionate about getting off the ground, I really think that this should just be canceled. If it does come out, however, then I really hope that it lives up to the legacy of the original.
Wait wait wait...cameo appearance?! what do you mean a cameo?? so this sequel was never gonna be about the original four guys?!. f**k that for a game of soldiers >:(
For the last few years it was being written as a 'passing the torch' type deal.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Feb 26, 2014, 05:11:04 AM
For the last few years it was being written as a 'passing the torch' type deal.
So was every other Hollywoood remake. Look where THAT turned out.
You have been told the truth.
Now... I must die...
This should have been made 10 years ago...scratch that, 20 years ago.
Quote from: Hubbs on Feb 26, 2014, 05:02:26 AM
Wait wait wait...cameo appearance?! what do you mean a cameo?? so this sequel was never gonna be about the original four guys?!. f**k that for a game of soldiers >:(
And I REALLY liked their idea of Egon being all bitter, having turned into an alcoholic, lost and eye and wearing an eyepatch.
Spoiler
... NOT!
f**k this T___T
so i'm assuming this is dead
Ghostbusters 2 commentary
http://redlettermedia.bandcamp.com/ (http://redlettermedia.bandcamp.com/)
http://www.deadline.com/2014/03/ghostbusters-movie-going-forward-without-ivan-reitman-sony/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.deadline.com/2014/03/ghostbusters-movie-going-forward-without-ivan-reitman-sony/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)
LEGO MOVIE Duo Reportedly In Talks To Direct GHOSTBUSTERS 3
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/notyetamovie/news/?a=96435#GLRXhyhEKX48MXyx.99 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/notyetamovie/news/?a=96435#GLRXhyhEKX48MXyx.99)
They're a good choice IMO.
Them directing would actually make me take notice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvURw7kOf0c#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvURw7kOf0c#ws)
Somebody change the thread title already ;-;
QuoteRe: Bill Murray Agrees To Ghostbusters 3
Quote from: xeno-kaname on May 17, 2014, 08:49:24 PM
Somebody change the thread title already ;-;
Yes ... it's like glimpsing bare boobs ....
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.thehollywoodgossip.com%2Fiu%2Ft_full%2Fv1364527604%2Ffacebook-removes-elbows.jpg&hash=baae003c841348d22324ff690d8876d6b2b0e395)
... then realizing it's just elbows.
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on May 17, 2014, 09:18:17 PM
QuoteRe: Bill Murray Agrees To Ghostbusters 3
Quote from: xeno-kaname on May 17, 2014, 08:49:24 PM
Somebody change the thread title already ;-;
Yes ... it's like glimpsing bare boobs ....
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.thehollywoodgossip.com%2Fiu%2Ft_full%2Fv1364527604%2Ffacebook-removes-elbows.jpg&hash=baae003c841348d22324ff690d8876d6b2b0e395)
... then realizing it's just elbows.
LOL fo reals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws)
Quote from: Crazy Rich on Oct 10, 2014, 03:21:33 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws)
Yep that sounds pretty shit, and money on the table now...it will be shit.
Female Ghostbusters and NO Katee Sackhoff whatsoever.
Frrrrrrak.
Quote from: Crazy Rich on Oct 10, 2014, 03:21:33 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws)
That single thumbnail for the videos resumes all the project... They're taking the and putting the 'hipster chick' audience before the original concept... Never gonna watch. NEVER.
I'm not so optimistic myself, if any of the original cast do return it'll be as completely new characters rather than as the characters we know and love.
My confidence in this movie is low.
TBH, the actual good thing about the original movies were the characters. If they are going to be entirely new characters for the next movie, then who the f**k cares? It could be some really big turd like the Alien vs Predator movies, basically cannibalizing the 'mythology' set by their predecesors and just trying to milk the franchise.
I don't think the title will be "Ghostbusters 3", then, probably it's just going to be titled "Ghostbusters", the title would be "Las Cazafantasmas" in my country, then xD
Ehhhhh.
There is probably a 99.9% chance Melissa McCarthy is going to be in this. And there is a 99.9% chance I wont watch because of that.
I just really hate the way the seem to be approaching it. "Oh, we don't know exactly what we're doing yet but it will be so cool! Like a superhero movie, where we start from scratch kinda sorta! Guys, look, it's Ghostbusters while totally not being Ghostbusters but still definitely being Ghostbusters!"
I hope for the best, I really do, but I'm just not feeling it right now.
Plus women ain't funny so...
Yeah.
Quote from: First Blood on Oct 10, 2014, 07:23:03 PM
There is probably a 99.9% chance Melissa McCarthy is going to be in this. And there is a 99.9% chance I wont watch because of that.
As soon as she mentioned females she was the first one to come to mind. I think she is pretty funny but it always feels like she never has any room to move her characters about freely.
Quote from: Jango1201 on Oct 10, 2014, 10:13:31 PM
Quote from: First Blood on Oct 10, 2014, 07:23:03 PM
There is probably a 99.9% chance Melissa McCarthy is going to be in this. And there is a 99.9% chance I wont watch because of that.
she never has any room to move her characters about freely.
She has that problem in real life too I think.
:D
It was going to suck with a bunch of fat senior dudes reprising characters they left behind over twenty five years ago, anyway. So nothing's really changed. ◦°˚\(*❛‿❛)/˚°◦
Quote from: BANE on Oct 10, 2014, 10:03:32 PM
Plus women ain't funny so...
Yeah.
So what's your excuse, then? :)
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 10, 2014, 10:30:30 PM
Quote from: BANE on Oct 10, 2014, 10:03:32 PM
Plus women ain't funny so...
Yeah.
So what's your excuse, then? :)
...
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FuiRMmoP.gif&hash=b5dafd4e23be28d2cb9eeb3daf87d401383c1337)
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 10, 2014, 09:46:32 PM
I just really hate the way the seem to be approaching it. "Oh, we don't know exactly what we're doing yet but it will be so cool! Like a superhero movie, where we start from scratch kinda sorta! Guys, look, it's Ghostbusters while totally not being Ghostbusters but still definitely being Ghostbusters!"
I hope for the best, I really do, but I'm just not feeling it right now.
Yea, I am not fond of their approach, it just really rubs me the wrong way. A part of me hopes I'm wrong about this movie but again my confidence is low.
Talking about Ghostbusters in general though got me to listen to the theme and some of the soundtrack.
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 10, 2014, 10:30:30 PM
It was going to suck with a bunch of fat senior dudes reprising characters they left behind over twenty five years ago, anyway. So nothing's really changed. ◦°˚\(*❛‿❛)/˚°◦
You're crazy. It was going to the Expendables of Ghostbuster films.
Quote from: First Blood on Oct 10, 2014, 10:41:31 PM
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 10, 2014, 10:30:30 PM
It was going to suck with a bunch of fat senior dudes reprising characters they left behind over twenty five years ago, anyway. So nothing's really changed. ◦°˚\(*❛‿❛)/˚°◦
You're crazy. It was going to the Expendables of Ghostbuster films.
Holy crap I just imagined the whole Expendables crew with Ghostbusters uniforms and proton packs. :laugh:
Arnold would have to be substituting for Rick Moranis.
Quote from: Omegazilla on Oct 10, 2014, 03:36:35 PM
Female Ghostbusters and NO Katee Sackhoff whatsoever.
You mis-spelt 'Claudia Black' - who has enough talent and comic timing to be a perfect fit for this. Never really seen KS do any convincing comedy stuff.
Melissa McCarthy and Vanessa Bayer or gtfo
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 11, 2014, 12:29:13 AM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Oct 10, 2014, 03:36:35 PM
Female Ghostbusters and NO Katee Sackhoff whatsoever.
You mis-spelt 'Claudia Black' - who has enough talent and comic timing to be a perfect fit for this. Never really seen KS do any convincing comedy stuff.
Meh...
Quote from: Aspie on Oct 11, 2014, 12:35:04 AM
Melissa McCarthy and Vanessa Bayer or gtfo
As a shrub and a tree in the background or...?
Probably the two best female comedians in America. :P
There's a difference between a comedian and a comedic actress Aspie. Those two are the latter. In fact McCarthy said in interviews she bombed horribly the few times she tried standup.
And I can't help but agree with you, which sort of just makes me feel...
meh. :-\
Aspie, please. Sarah Silverman and Maria Bamford.
Quote from: Aspie on Oct 11, 2014, 12:37:15 AM
Probably the two best female comedians in America. :P
She's not funny. She's annoying and needs to go away.
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 11, 2014, 12:39:03 AM
Aspie, please. Sarah Silverman and Maria Bamford.
Unf.
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 11, 2014, 12:39:03 AM
Aspie, please. Sarah Silverman and Maria Bamford.
As what? ???
Melissa McCarthy could be a pretty good dramatic actor I bet. Too bad she's stuck in shitty comedies.
I enjoyed Bridesmaids....
Aaaand that's about it.
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 11, 2014, 12:39:03 AM
Aspie, please. Sarah Silverman and Maria Bamford.
lol cvalda no
Melissa McCarthy should be banned from acting.
Like Janeane Garofalo, while her politics can be vile/obnoxious, I could see Silverman doing fairly well in this.
Black's got great comic timing, though, Bane. Not sure why you're underwhelmed by that suggestion. :) Sandra Bullock, herself, has, too.
It's weird how a lot of people just want female actress X, Y and Z to be in this, purely because of attractiveness, when a big part of what made the original ensemble of slacker types work, was how average-looking they all were. No matter who gets cast in this, it needs a sibling vibe between the lead characters. That was the biggest key behind why the differing personalities worked.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 11, 2014, 02:01:24 AM
Like Janeane Garofalo, while her politics can be vile/obnoxious
How so?
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 11, 2014, 12:39:03 AM
Aspie, please. Sarah Silverman and Maria Bamford.
I'm losing it already just thinking about Bamford's expressions.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 11, 2014, 02:01:24 AM
Like Janeane Garofalo, while her politics can be vile/obnoxious, I could see Silverman doing fairly well in this.
But neither of them are
funny... :-\
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 11, 2014, 02:01:24 AM
Black's got great comic timing, though, Bane. Not sure why you're underwhelmed by that suggestion. :) Sandra Bullock, herself, has, too.
Alright, I was a bit quick to judge, having never seen her in anything but my brief 15 minute Youtube hunt. But Bullock's mediocre at best, if
The Heat is anything to go by. Although maybe with some really good writing...I don't know.
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2014, 02:31:15 AM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Oct 11, 2014, 02:01:24 AM
Like Janeane Garofalo, while her politics can be vile/obnoxious, I could see Silverman doing fairly well in this.
But neither of them are funny... :-\
Watch
Mystery Men yo.
The funniest thing about that movie was William H. Macy's character.
Goddamn you Bane.
anyone but Amy poehler
Quote from: Aspie on Oct 11, 2014, 02:41:38 AM
anyone but Amy poehler
I'd rather have her than Tina Fey.
If Tina Fey has her name on anything to do with this I.......
ugh
Her movie output has been better than Bill Murray's shit over the last decade, so... ◦°˚\(*❛‿❛)/˚°◦
Poehler's or Fey's?
Because no.
how is bill Murray even that damn popular
like damn he's only been in like 3 good movies
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2014, 02:53:53 AM
Poehler's or Fey's?
Because no.
Both, haha :laugh:
But don't worry, Melissa McCarthy is there to pick up his slack in that new movie he's in.
Quote from: Aspie on Oct 11, 2014, 02:54:21 AM
how is bill Murray even that damn popular
like damn he's only been in like 3 good movies
You are out of your f**king mind. Please die.
Quote from: First Blood on Oct 11, 2014, 02:56:18 AM
Quote from: Aspie on Oct 11, 2014, 02:54:21 AM
how is bill Murray even that damn popular
like damn he's only been in like 3 good movies
You are out of your f**king mind. Please die.
the first ghostbusters
zombieland
and that one other movie with Bruce willis
k
Quote from: Cvalda on Oct 11, 2014, 02:55:34 AM
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2014, 02:53:53 AM
Poehler's or Fey's?
Because no.
Both, haha :laugh:
But don't worry, Melissa McCarthy is there to pick up his slack in that new movie he's in.
Quantity maybe, but I won't argue with you about quality because I know you dislike Wes Anderson films.
And Murray was far above McCarthy in St. Vincent what are you on about. She played the straight woman...
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2014, 03:03:38 AM
I won't argue with you about quality because I know you dislike Paul Anderson films.
Which Paul Anderson? ::)
Sensible people generally do tend to dislike Paul W.S. Anderson films, yes.
When you gonna watch Boogie Nights? :P
f**k this shit, god dammit why am I so god damn DUUUUUMMMBBB. >:( >:( >:(
Ok.
It's Wes Anderson.
Too many f**king andersons.
Quote from: First Blood on Oct 11, 2014, 03:11:24 AM
When you gonna watch Boogie Nights? :P
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lhb8kgH5HV1qzz55x.png&hash=335d75dcf7c5c5031b1ea5af3d920cd87f8cc930)
Quote from: BANE on Oct 11, 2014, 03:13:24 AM
f**k this shit, god dammit why am I so god damn DUUUUUMMMBBB. >:( >:( >:(
Maybe you were born that way ◦°˚\(*❛‿❛)/˚°◦
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA it's K BANE for like 3 years I thought Paul and Wes were the same guy
I'd love to see Kristen Schaal in this. She should be in everything, really.
Also second the suggestions of Claudia Black (not a comedian, but like Xenomorphine said, great timing) and Sarah Silverman.
And so long as we're on the subject of Daily Show part-timers, Jessica Williams is great too.
Bill Murray is a comedic genius. Don't even....
Quote from: Crazy Rich on Oct 10, 2014, 03:21:33 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4XCF7QoUf8#ws)
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.american-buddha.com%2Fablade2.31b.jpg&hash=c28e093b304d307767b7fc7de53de64a6feedbcd)
Spoiler
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.american-buddha.com%2Fablade2.31c.jpg&hash=ffe4aae90f46749849daefe5113c9822df80f570)
I too would love Kristen Schaal.
a bill murray cameo would be the only way to get my money, i even went to see zombieland just for his 5 minutes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofcGAAf_QDc#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofcGAAf_QDc#ws)
They've been trying to go at this for so long that no matter how it turns up I can only see it being one big Mongolian clusterf**k. It's almost like Indy 4 in that the people behind it are mostly disinterested, it's only because they're asked about it so often that they come up with an excuse (not a reason) to do it.
Nah, they reason they end up doing it is always one thing: $$$.
These idiots seem completely unaware that what made the original work so well, was the combination of the genius talents of Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Ivan Reitman, Dark Helmet, Richard Thornburg and Sigourney Weaver in one and the same movie.
Quote from: Eva on Oct 13, 2014, 07:10:29 PM
These idiots seem completely unaware that what made the original work so well, was the combination of the genius talents of Dan Aykroyd, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Ivan Reitman, Dark Helmet, Richard Thornburg and Sigourney Weaver in one and the same movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhnIqgTEBS8# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhnIqgTEBS8#)
I hope this fails miserably.
It will.
It's almost guaranteed to. Like Eva said, they don't seem to have any grasp on what they're doing.
Let's not worry too much about what's been done. It's like a superhero movie. We can update it with cool technology. And we'll make it darker, like a horror movie. Maybe we'll pull some ideas from the original, but it'll be its own thing. I have no clue if we're using the song or not. Maybe the old actors can come back in different roles.
Maybe they can make up their damn mind on what they want to do before they set out and actually do something, because as it is I have no faith at all in this.
The Ghostbusters charm was all about the original characters and they can't recreate that (as it is the case with most 80s film classics) with an updated, hipster young cast. Not in any way that would interest the fans of the old films in the slightest imo.
Quote from: Crazy Rich on Oct 13, 2014, 07:14:20 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhnIqgTEBS8# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhnIqgTEBS8#)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.tumblr.com%2F1234ab8bedc6b6736b1aa071c1108c8f%2Ftumblr_inline_ms8y1pVNIh1qz4rgp.gif&hash=511073897b4b71b80da754f249f3f1eee915f375)
But we have all these crazy, modern ideas that we might use maybe~
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 13, 2014, 07:25:36 PM
But we have all these crazy, modern ideas that we might use maybe~
Imagine if one of the producers of all these endless remakes, would just flat out admit:
We're remaking this film because we haven't got any ideas of our own and we want to make as much profit as possible, from investing as little creative effort as possible into this. :)
It's the same issue as the Total Recall and Robocop remakes. Peoploe who liked the original for what it was and understood the cultural aspects of it then are expecting that movie. But a rebbot or remake can't do that, it has to appeal to a new audience.
Most of the classic films Hollywood remakes, are so well made and well told that they should be perfectly capable of still being relevant to new audiences, no matter if they were made +20 years ago. To add, the underlying themes in the original Total Recall and RoboCop (using tav's examples here) were much stronger infused in the plots of those films, than in their respective remakes.
Those themes are just as relevant today (perhaps even more so than ever before) as they were in the 80s, but the remakes come across as simply being empty CGI action vehicles with little to say about anything, compared to what Paul Verhoeven achieved back in the day.
The new one was just a gritty action movie(with toned down violence) that failed to achieve the great dark political humor that Verhoeven(who btw is a time traveler) did.
Well, these remakes are aimed mainly at the US PG13 crowd by the look of it, aren't they, and I reckon the film makers don't credit that audience segment to have any interest in watching dark satire disguised as action. Just mindless, dumb action.
Sadly you are super correct. Sometimes this country just....no....
Yep its the Robocop debacle all over again -_-
Its BOUND to be a PG-13 with tonnes of toilet humour.
@Eva: We think alike my dear :)
It's better when it's R. Although Ghostbusters was PG back when PG-13 wasn't a thing, so if it ends up as PG-13, that'd make some sense.
Gillian Anderson on her reddit thingy saw the news on the new ghostbusters and said this.
Quote"OH MY GOD, I just looked it up online. Paul Feig, cast me now! Start a Twitter petition! I'm free!!!!! I'm free I'm free and I'm funny, goddamnit! MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!"
If shes in,I'm in.
I'd watch if Gillian is on it :D
Don't turn this into a age rating rant. That's not a problem at all.
The original was PG but still quite adult.
Quote from: Hubbs on Oct 14, 2014, 02:42:28 PM
The original was PG but still quite adult.
Hence all the child fans, toys, cartoons, etc.?
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 14, 2014, 03:03:36 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Oct 14, 2014, 02:42:28 PM
The original was PG but still quite adult.
Hence all the child fans, toys, cartoons, etc.?
Still quite adult, scared me as a kid, the terror dogs, the library ghost, the slightly adult humour, spiritual blowjob (hinted at) etc...It had quite an eerie atmosphere.
The toys mainly came off the cartoon which was made more in line for kids obviously.
Ghostbusters' Reboot: Will Bill Murray Return in Smaller Role?
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/ghostbusters-reboot-will-bill-murray-return-in-smaller-role-1201330132/ (http://variety.com/2014/film/news/ghostbusters-reboot-will-bill-murray-return-in-smaller-role-1201330132/)
This whole project is a mess.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Oct 15, 2014, 12:27:34 AM
This whole project is a mess.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageserver.moviepilot.com%2F-d7f07a57-c923-4b44-97a6-efaa470c8ead.gif%3Fwidth%3D400%26amp%3Bheight%3D237&hash=54539e71e7c29c2e4504f6a22100600d17cd1eb0)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wolfgnards.com%2Fmedia%2Fblogs%2Fphotos%2Fcelebrities%2Fgb-mood-slime.jpg&hash=b7438739726fce03b41decb5d1d217750381242a)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.american-buddha.com%2Fghostbust.270d.gif&hash=e2bff08bbc4b69bc1641bcbe349b7abc329ab8bc)
Seems par for the course.
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
Watch the cast and director of 'Ghostbusters' reunite on 'Today' for 30th anniversary. (http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/11/05/ghostbusters-reunion-30th-anniversary-today-show/)
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
Nice. :)
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
Call me bad taste, but I think they could have photoshopped Harold Ramis in ghost form there... All blue and transparent...
Weaver looks good, unf.
Quote from: Magegg on Nov 05, 2014, 08:56:55 PM
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
Call me bad taste, but I think they could have photoshopped Harold Ramis in ghost form there... All blue and transparent...
And on the inside cover he's halfway sucked up into a proton pack.
None of the Ghostbusters cast look like they've aged nearly as much since 1989 as Lindsay Lohan has since 2004.
Quote from: BANE on Nov 05, 2014, 09:57:41 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Nov 05, 2014, 08:56:55 PM
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
Call me bad taste, but I think they could have photoshopped Harold Ramis in ghost form there... All blue and transparent...
And on the inside cover he's halfway sucked up into a proton pack.
I've no interest in the new film, but that would make a hilarious magazine cover concept for all the wrong reasons...and those are always the best reasons.
I mean this quite sincerely.
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
That can't be Weaver! she looks...like a completely different person lol! (surgery? major airbrushing/photoshop?).
Quote from: Hubbs on Nov 06, 2014, 03:38:19 AM
(surgery? major airbrushing/photoshop?).
Entertainment Weekly.
Quote from: GQSioux on Nov 05, 2014, 08:47:21 PM
what a tease
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.aintitcool.com%2Fmedia%2Fuploads%2F2014%2Fmerrick%2Few-reunions-1337-1338_large.jpg&hash=ad6aa692a181f253793a84b9d77ba23f7aad9924)
This reminds me how sad it is that Rick Moranis retired from acting many years ago =/
here are the new ghostbusters
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8YnDX2CcAA8EZs.jpg)
Ghostbusters reboot director Paul Feig has appeared to confirm that Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy and Saturday Night Live stars Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon will lead the film's cast.
shame because i didnt want melissa mccarthy no were near this
No idea who the two on the bottom are?
And they didn't even get Katee Sackhoff.
I mean, frakkity frak. She would've been perfect.
Quote from: mez86 on Jan 27, 2015, 09:36:30 PM
here are the new ghostbusters
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8YnDX2CcAA8EZs.jpg
Ghostbusters reboot director Paul Feig has appeared to confirm that Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy and Saturday Night Live stars Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon will lead the film's cast.
shame because i didnt want melissa mccarthy no were near this
Where's Rainn Wilson >:(
Paul Feig @paulfeig
In other news, #Ghostbusters will be hitting theaters July 22, 2016. Save the date!
I think most of my ambition for any future Ghostbusters project died with Harold Ramis. :/
I was still somewhat optimistic after the point when Harold Ramis died, but that optimism then died later when the they gave out news and promises about the direction they're going with for the movie.
Paul Feig @paulfeig
In other news, #Ghostbusters will be hitting theaters July 22, 2016. Save the date!
Can somebody finally change the title of this thread please ::)
Quote from: mez86 on Jan 27, 2015, 09:36:30 PM
here are the new ghostbusters
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8YnDX2CcAA8EZs.jpg
Ghostbusters reboot director Paul Feig has appeared to confirm that Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy and Saturday Night Live stars Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon will lead the film's cast.
shame because i didnt want melissa mccarthy no were near this
hmm so this movie still will be called ghostbusters....but there are no original team members in it... well..ladies and gentelmens- this will turn up as yet another failure movie.
It's a reboot. Robocop didn't have anyone from the original in it.
I'm cautiously optimistic, but I can't stand Melissa McCarthy's schtick, if this turns into a wacky slapstick comedy I am going to punch something. I really like Kristen Wiig though, I am guessing she will be the "Venkman"?
McCarthy, Wiig and Jones are all similar ages (mid 40s) with McKinnon being about 15 years younger (31), so I'm thinking that maybe they are making her be the "newbie", also the original team were all under 40 when the first movie was made, Ackroyd, the youngest, was only about 32, which makes me think the new team is going to be more established than the original team was, perhaps this will not be an origin story, even though in leaked emails Feig said he did want to make an origin story, so who knows.
Quote from: AvatarIII on Jan 28, 2015, 01:14:01 PM
It's a reboot. Robocop didn't have anyone from the original in it.
I'm cautiously optimistic, but I can't stand Melissa McCarthy's schtick, if this turns into a wacky slapstick comedy I am going to punch something. I really like Kristen Wiig though, I am guessing she will be the "Venkman"?
McCarthy, Wiig and Jones are all similar ages (mid 40s) with McKinnon being about 15 years younger (31), so I'm thinking that maybe they are making her be the "newbie", also the original team were all under 40 when the first movie was made, Ackroyd, the youngest, was only about 32, which makes me think the new team is going to be more established than the original team was, perhaps this will not be an origin story, even though in leaked emails Feig said he did want to make an origin story, so who knows.
reeboot huh.... I am out.
Just try to see this as a spin-off and everything will be OK.
This could very well be set in the world of the other films. In fact, it probably is.
I hate the word reboot. It has so many definitions and every time it's used it's all people cling to.
A reboot can exist in-continuity, it can be a spinoff, it can ignore just certain parts of a series, it can ignore everything and be a complete remake, it can be completely ambiguous on the matter, it can be a new adaptation...
The word doesn't even phase me anymore. I don't understand why some people get so hung up on it.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jan 28, 2015, 02:37:53 PMQuote from: Magegg on Jan 28, 2015, 02:36:25 PM
Just try to see this as a spin-off and everything will be OK.
This could very well be set in the world of the other films. In fact, it probably is.
I hate the word reboot. It has so many definitions and every time it's used it's all people cling to.
A reboot can exist in-continuity, it can be a spinoff, it can ignore just certain parts of a series, it can ignore everything and be a complete remake, it can be completely ambiguous on the matter, it can be a new adaptation...
The word doesn't even phase me anymore. I don't understand why some people get so hung up on it.
Let's call this a relaunch.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jan 28, 2015, 02:37:53 PM
This could very well be set in the world of the other films. In fact, it probably is.
I hate the word reboot. It has so many definitions and every time it's used it's all people cling to.
A reboot can exist in-continuity, it can be a spinoff, it can ignore just certain parts of a series, it can ignore everything and be a complete remake, it can be completely ambiguous on the matter, it can be a new adaptation...
The word doesn't even phase me anymore. I don't understand why some people get so hung up on it.
Reboots can and often do exist in the same ubniverse as the originals, but i think it's pretty safe to say that Sony don't want to do that.
QuoteLeaked emails from the Sony hack hinted at this casting. As The Daily Beast reported, Sony chief Amy Pascal sent Ivan Reitman, director/producer of the original Ghostbusters franchise, her own bit of dream casting, saying that she was "hearing" that Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Melissa McCarthy, Amy Schumer, and Lizzy Kaplan were interested in starring in it.
In another email, Feig starts spitballing ideas for the movie, which he assumed would address Pascal's insistence that the reboot be "totally original with completely different characters" but still connected to the original franchise in a "clever way."
I don't think "clever way" means "same universe"
Quote(SPOILERS are below, assuming any of these ideas make it into a final script.)
Feig said that this reboot would unequivocally not be a sequel, and that the humans wouldn't be afraid of ghosts at the start of the film because they haven't encountered them yet. He also said the villain would be a convicted murderer—hopefully played by Peter Dinklage—who turns into a ghost during a botched execution. (Morbid! Love it!) This apparently will give Dinklage's character the power to raise an army of ghost villains, which could be famous people throughout history.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/27/the-epic-all-female-ghostbusters-cast-chosen-kristen-wiig-melissa-mccarthy-kate-mckinnon-and-leslie-jones.html (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/27/the-epic-all-female-ghostbusters-cast-chosen-kristen-wiig-melissa-mccarthy-kate-mckinnon-and-leslie-jones.html)
doesn't sound like either Pascal or Feig want it to be in the same universe at all. you would have thought that if it was the same universe, everyone would know ghosts exist.
Quote from: Magegg on Jan 28, 2015, 02:52:23 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jan 28, 2015, 02:37:53 PMQuote from: Magegg on Jan 28, 2015, 02:36:25 PM
Just try to see this as a spin-off and everything will be OK.
This could very well be set in the world of the other films. In fact, it probably is.
I hate the word reboot. It has so many definitions and every time it's used it's all people cling to.
A reboot can exist in-continuity, it can be a spinoff, it can ignore just certain parts of a series, it can ignore everything and be a complete remake, it can be completely ambiguous on the matter, it can be a new adaptation...
The word doesn't even phase me anymore. I don't understand why some people get so hung up on it.
Let's call this a relaunch.
That's just as vague.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jan 28, 2015, 03:13:07 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jan 28, 2015, 02:52:23 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jan 28, 2015, 02:37:53 PMQuote from: Magegg on Jan 28, 2015, 02:36:25 PM
Just try to see this as a spin-off and everything will be OK.
This could very well be set in the world of the other films. In fact, it probably is.
I hate the word reboot. It has so many definitions and every time it's used it's all people cling to.
A reboot can exist in-continuity, it can be a spinoff, it can ignore just certain parts of a series, it can ignore everything and be a complete remake, it can be completely ambiguous on the matter, it can be a new adaptation...
The word doesn't even phase me anymore. I don't understand why some people get so hung up on it.
Let's call this a relaunch.
That's just as vague.
Mmmh, Relaunch = Basically, new material?
McCarthy kills it for me. Kristen Wigg is the only good thing about this announcement.
(https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10407850_924765567564037_7381434841712125417_n.jpg?oh=b2f3dd70764e099682461bbc5052c013&oe=55596DC0)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXZZvCsio3U# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXZZvCsio3U#)
So the original movie was about four blokes...
So lets remake this and make it with...four women! or does that sound too stupid?
Genius! the perfect gimmick, everyone will love that...how could it go wrong?!
What if everyone doesn't like it?
Meh we'll just do it anyway, cram enough CGI in there and someone will like it.
It does seem cheesy as hell but to be honest they should have gone with 3 black female leads and then brought in the white chick half way through as homage to the first movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC87CzkqXPU#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC87CzkqXPU#ws)
I'd be fine with an all-female cast if they were great comedians and/or the writers had good pedigree. But like Kaname said, Kristen Wiig is the only talent involved with proven chops. I'll be surprised if it's watchable, let alone good.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jan 29, 2015, 04:59:43 AM
So the original movie was about four blokes...
So lets remake this and make it with...four women! or does that sound too stupid?
Genius! the perfect gimmick, everyone will love that...how could it go wrong?!
What if everyone doesn't like it?
Meh we'll just do it anyway, cram enough CGI in there and someone will like it.
I fricking agree with you in most movie opinions.
Give it up Aykroyd, this disaster hasn't even be finalised yet, we don't need sequels already. And sequels to the original franchise? yeah right...hows that gonna work? We have this pending failure all because you couldn't get a sequel to the original franchise sorted.
http://theinterrobang.com/dan-aykroyd-gives-clues-new-ghostbusters-reveals-plans-another-sequel-already-works/ (http://theinterrobang.com/dan-aykroyd-gives-clues-new-ghostbusters-reveals-plans-another-sequel-already-works/)
Russo Brothers To Helm Male-Led GHOSTBUSTERS Movie From IRON MAN 3 WriterQuoteSome longtime Ghostbusters fans weren't sure how to feel when it was revealed that Paul Feig would be helming a female-led reboot of the franchise, but it turns out that that movie is just the tip of the iceberg. Sony are setting up a new production company - "Ghost Corps" - which will include Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd to create a whole new series of Ghostbusters movies. The first of these has scored some major talent, with Captain America: The Winter Soldier directors Joe and Anthony Russo set to direct and produce, while Drew Pearce (Iron Man 3, Mission: Impossible 5) will write. Meanwhile, Channing Tatum will produce and star if all goes to plan.
"We want to expand the Ghostbusters universe in ways that will include different films, TV shows, merchandise, all things that are part of modern filmed entertainment," Reitman tells Deadline. "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 hear. It's just the beginning of what I hope will be a lot of wonderful movies." Feig's movie comes first and will star Kristen Wiig. Melissa McCarthy, Leslie Jones, and Kate McKinnon.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423)
Well that is just awesome 8)
Quote from: MudButt on Mar 09, 2015, 10:16:40 PM
Russo Brothers To Helm Male-Led GHOSTBUSTERS Movie From IRON MAN 3 Writer
QuoteSome longtime Ghostbusters fans weren't sure how to feel when it was revealed that Paul Feig would be helming a female-led reboot of the franchise, but it turns out that that movie is just the tip of the iceberg. Sony are setting up a new production company - "Ghost Corps" - which will include Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd to create a whole new series of Ghostbusters movies. The first of these has scored some major talent, with Captain America: The Winter Soldier directors Joe and Anthony Russo set to direct and produce, while Drew Pearce (Iron Man 3, Mission: Impossible 5) will write. Meanwhile, Channing Tatum will produce and star if all goes to plan.
"We want to expand the Ghostbusters universe in ways that will include different films, TV shows, merchandise, all things that are part of modern filmed entertainment," Reitman tells Deadline. "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 hear. It's just the beginning of what I hope will be a lot of wonderful movies." Feig's movie comes first and will star Kristen Wiig. Melissa McCarthy, Leslie Jones, and Kate McKinnon.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423)
Well that is just awesome 8)
If it's true about them directing the Infinity Wars, how in the hell will they have the time?
And Channing Tatum is a horrible choice. Ugh
Umm.
What.
I'll wait until the Scooby Doo crossover movie, as well as the version with the gorilla and the Mythbusters young adult fantasy spin-off.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fanimatedviews.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2007%2F05%2Ffilmghost-02.JPG&hash=e81be6345a2abfa6348ad3cec73af5bf50187aa9)
What's next? Vampirebusters? Bring it on.
Quote from: xeno-kaname on Mar 09, 2015, 10:22:03 PM
Quote from: MudButt on Mar 09, 2015, 10:16:40 PM
Russo Brothers To Helm Male-Led GHOSTBUSTERS Movie From IRON MAN 3 Writer
QuoteSome longtime Ghostbusters fans weren't sure how to feel when it was revealed that Paul Feig would be helming a female-led reboot of the franchise, but it turns out that that movie is just the tip of the iceberg. Sony are setting up a new production company - "Ghost Corps" - which will include Ivan Reitman and Dan Aykroyd to create a whole new series of Ghostbusters movies. The first of these has scored some major talent, with Captain America: The Winter Soldier directors Joe and Anthony Russo set to direct and produce, while Drew Pearce (Iron Man 3, Mission: Impossible 5) will write. Meanwhile, Channing Tatum will produce and star if all goes to plan.
"We want to expand the Ghostbusters universe in ways that will include different films, TV shows, merchandise, all things that are part of modern filmed entertainment," Reitman tells Deadline. "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 hear. It's just the beginning of what I hope will be a lot of wonderful movies." Feig's movie comes first and will star Kristen Wiig. Melissa McCarthy, Leslie Jones, and Kate McKinnon.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423 (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=116423)
Well that is just awesome 8)
If it's true about them directing the Infinity Wars, how in the hell will they have the time?
And Channing Tatum is a horrible choice. Ugh
I'm guessing the'yll make Civil war filming this year for release in 2016, then Ghostbusters film in 2016 to release in 2017, then Infinity War in 2017 to release in 2018, although they have never officially signed for Infinity War, they are just the front runners.
I'm pretty sure the Russos are some Marvel Studios infiltrates whose mission is to fill Sony's head with stupid ideas so they bomb yet again and Disney can buy Spider-Man's rights back.
This news is going down like a lead balloon almost everywhere.
Eh? This is confusing as f**k? So is this one in continuity with the first 2 films and separate to the female lead Ghostbusters? Or is it connected to that one or its own thing not related to either? This is all a bit strange.
Quote from: Keg on Mar 10, 2015, 05:07:30 PM
Eh? This is confusing as f**k? So is this one in continuity with the first 2 films and separate to the female lead Ghostbusters? Or is it connected to that one or its own thing not related to either? This is all a bit strange.
Ghostbusters Cinematic Universe.
Chris Pratt is rumored to star. WHAT A SURPRISE.
good for him though.
Quote from: Magegg on Mar 10, 2015, 05:11:46 PM
Quote from: Keg on Mar 10, 2015, 05:07:30 PM
Eh? This is confusing as f**k? So is this one in continuity with the first 2 films and separate to the female lead Ghostbusters? Or is it connected to that one or its own thing not related to either? This is all a bit strange.
Ghostbusters Cinematic Universe.
Pretty much. But i think the original films exist outside of this new continuity.
But what do I know? I doubt Sony even knows. My head hurts.
Quote from: MudButt on Mar 10, 2015, 05:17:09 PM
Chris Pratt is rumored to star. WHAT A SURPRISE.
good for him though.
A MUCH better choice than Tatum at least. I hear he's still in it though >:(
Chris Pratt's style of humor definitely compliments this type of movie much more than Tatums.
I found Tatum to be quite enjoyable and charismatic in the Jump Street movies as well as Magic Mike. He gets better as an actor in each film, hell, he probably would've got an Oscar nomination for Foxcatcher but sadly he had Carell and Ruffalo to compete against.
Channing Tatum's basically the new Ben Affleck - good looking guy who's underrated as an actor by film fans. He'll probably direct the Best Picture winner in 2019 (if you count Dear John as his Gigli).
He's fantastic in Foxcatcher, as are the other two main actors. I thought Carell was actually the least impressive of the core trio, but he's so plainly playing against type that he made the most obvious choice for nomination I guess.
Quote from: Vertigo on Mar 10, 2015, 10:06:37 PM
Channing Tatum's basically the new Ben Affleck - good looking guy who's underrated as an actor by film fans. He'll probably direct the Best Picture winner in 2019 (if you count Dear John as his Gigli).
He's fantastic in Foxcatcher, as are the other two main actors. I thought Carell was actually the least impressive of the core trio, but he's so plainly playing against type that he made the most obvious choice for nomination I guess.
I agree, not that I don't think Carell did good, he gave a great performance, but had it not been for the prosthetic add-ons he probably would've never received a nomination. Tatum was great though, he's really proven himself lately, and I have a feeling his career is only going to get better. People just think of his early films, the teen-romantic dramas that make some profit but are full of cliches. I think of his later work as a comedic and dramatic actor. If he gets the role in Ghostbusters 3 then I'm all for it.
I liked his humor in 21 Jumpstreet and his acting isn't bad he just looks completely wrong for this type of movie, IMO. The type of humor he usually does feels like it would be wrong tonally.
This whole venture has already failed, they are more interested in $$$ than the actual love of movie making.
Someone change the thread title. I suggest:
"Ghostbusters 3 (both of them)"
or
"Ghostbusters 3a and 3b"
They are reboots so really the thread should be called "Ghostbusters Reboot" I'd likely the girl one will be called "Ghostbusters" and the guy one will be "Ghostbusters: _____" or maybe both will have subtitles.
Quote from: AvatarIII on Mar 11, 2015, 10:58:16 AM"Ghostbusters Reboots"
Quote from: AvatarIII on Mar 11, 2015, 10:58:16 AMI'd likely the girl one will be called "Ghostbusters" and the guy one will be "Ghostbusters: _____" or maybe both will have subtitles.
Ghostbsters and THE Ghostbusters,
Meh, we have it easy on Spanish:
- Los Cazafantasmas
&
- Las Cazafantasmas
;D
http://www.ramascreen.com/ghostsbusters-reboot-director-responds-to-haters-and-confirms-ghostbusters-cinematic-univers/ (http://www.ramascreen.com/ghostsbusters-reboot-director-responds-to-haters-and-confirms-ghostbusters-cinematic-univers/)
Lol
http://comicbook.com/2015/03/16/ghostbusters-director-paul-feig-is-unsure-on-the-original-theme-/ (http://comicbook.com/2015/03/16/ghostbusters-director-paul-feig-is-unsure-on-the-original-theme-/)
Good lord why is he even making this movie.
http://collider.com/new-ghostbusters-movie-rating-filming-locations/ (http://collider.com/new-ghostbusters-movie-rating-filming-locations/)
Absolute rubbish Feig, just stop right now. You and Sony have put out the idea and started work but its been rightly destroyed by most as tacky nonsense and now you're stuck with it. Clearly trying to make the best out of a bad situation now.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/ghostbusters-3-paul-feig-hits-back-at-vile-sexist-backlash-to-allfemale-reboot-10110868.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/ghostbusters-3-paul-feig-hits-back-at-vile-sexist-backlash-to-allfemale-reboot-10110868.html)
And again with the old sexist accusation, despite the universal panning of this idea. You can't hide behind easy transparent PC dribble Feig, this is a gimmick and you know it.
Haha, this is pure entertainment. No way that any new Ghostbusters movie can top this internet fan-raging. Look, I liked Ghostbusters as a kid...even the horrible sequel. I had some Ghostbusters toys and I loved watching the animated show. But now I just don't have that love and connection to this franchise anymore.
Or like Hubbs would always say: "Really?!? People still care about this?!? People still watch that?!?"
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 18, 2015, 05:33:38 AM
http://collider.com/new-ghostbusters-movie-rating-filming-locations/ (http://collider.com/new-ghostbusters-movie-rating-filming-locations/)
Absolute rubbish Feig, just stop right now. You and Sony have put out the idea and started work but its been rightly destroyed by most as tacky nonsense and now you're stuck with it. Clearly trying to make the best out of a bad situation now.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/ghostbusters-3-paul-feig-hits-back-at-vile-sexist-backlash-to-allfemale-reboot-10110868.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/ghostbusters-3-paul-feig-hits-back-at-vile-sexist-backlash-to-allfemale-reboot-10110868.html)
And again with the old sexist accusation, despite the universal panning of this idea. You can't hide behind easy transparent PC dribble Feig, this is a gimmick and you know it.
Dude, soooooooo much of the backlash is sexist. I've seen it in comments sections on various websites, I've seen it on my facebook feed, I've heard out the mouths of friends.
Quote from: tmjhur on Mar 18, 2015, 11:26:25 AM
Dude, soooooooo much of the backlash is sexist. I've seen it in comments sections on various websites, I've seen it on my facebook feed, I've heard out the mouths of friends.
Could you cite some examples, out of curiosity?
Justin Kroll @krolljvar
BREAKING: Chris Hemsworth to joins GHOSTBUSTERS as teams secretary story coming
Quote from: ace3g on Jun 10, 2015, 11:47:59 PM
Justin Kroll @krolljvar
BREAKING: Chris Hemsworth to joins GHOSTBUSTERS as teams secretary story coming
So he will be a male alter ego of Janine? :P
Apparently there's more to his character than just posing as male counter to Janine according to Kroll, but he wont reveal what. He does say it makes the character "a lot more fun" though.
I hope there's some humor
The most random casting ever, lets just cast Hemsworth because he's a big A-list star, doesn't have to fit the role or anything.
'Hey I have this great idea for Ghostbusters, lets swap the genders for every character! ta da!! So the Ghostbusters are now women and the receptionist is now a bloke! Hilarity will ensue I'm telling ya.' ( -_- )
Isn't this kinda reverse sexism? Seems to me he's been cast for his looks and physique (what else), so would I be right in assuming he'll be the eye candy for the female Ghostbusters? Something for them to perv over and crack naughty jokes/innuendos. Wouldn't that be just as bad as having the same deal for a female character? I'm guessing of course this angle is perfectly fine and will cause no uproar by the feminists ::)
Either the whole good looking team will fancy Hemsworth accept for McCarthy, but in a hilarious ironic twist ( ::) ), Hemsworth will only be interested in McCarthy. Or McCarthy will be lusting over Hemsworth like a parasite whilst the others be all scientific and such. Or he'll go with the black female Ghostbuster to earn the movie a PC badge.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jun 11, 2015, 03:11:20 AM
The most random casting ever, lets just cast Hemsworth because he's a big A-list star, doesn't have to fit the role or anything.
'Hey I have this great idea for Ghostbusters, lets swap the genders for every character! ta da!! So the Ghostbusters are now women and the receptionist is now a bloke! Hilarity will ensue I'm telling ya.' ( -_- )
Isn't this kinda reverse sexism? Seems to me he's been cast for his looks and physique (what else), so would I be right in assuming he'll be the eye candy for the female Ghostbusters? Something for them to perv over and crack naughty jokes/innuendos. Wouldn't that be just as bad as having the same deal for a female character? I'm guessing of course this angle is perfectly fine and will cause no uproar by the feminists ::)
Either the whole good looking team will fancy Hemsworth accept for McCarthy, but in a hilarious ironic twist ( ::) ), Hemsworth will only be interested in McCarthy. Or McCarthy will be lusting over Hemsworth like a parasite whilst the others be all scientific and such. Or he'll go with the black female Ghostbuster to earn the movie a PC badge.
Agreed. He was bitching about sexism and then does THIS which is a blatant sexist cliche that I don't know how he doesn't realize it himself.
I LOL and liked the casting ;D I'm all in for a goofball/surreal take on Ghostbusters :laugh:
Paul Feig @paulfeig 26m26 minutes ago
And ... action! #slimetimestartstomorrow
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CHvIkv3WEAAm1Y5.jpg:large)
So, Slimer will be present in this film? :)
some set photos
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/markcassidycbm/news/?a=121857
Wow they're still actually making this.
Paul FeigVerified account
@paulfeig
#whatyougonnawear
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIs-4n9UwAAtKkW.jpg:large)
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 11, 2015, 04:40:45 AM
I LOL and liked the casting ;D I'm all in for a goofball/surreal take on Ghostbusters :laugh:
Because the original wasn't goofball/surreal enough?
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Jun 29, 2015, 11:37:46 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 11, 2015, 04:40:45 AM
I LOL and liked the casting ;D I'm all in for a goofball/surreal take on Ghostbusters :laugh:
Because the original wasn't goofball/surreal enough?
Moore goofiness is welcome XD
Quote from: Hubbs on Jun 11, 2015, 03:11:20 AM
The most random casting ever, lets just cast Hemsworth because he's a big A-list star, doesn't have to fit the role or anything.
'Hey I have this great idea for Ghostbusters, lets swap the genders for every character! ta da!! So the Ghostbusters are now women and the receptionist is now a bloke! Hilarity will ensue I'm telling ya.' ( -_- )
Isn't this kinda reverse sexism? Seems to me he's been cast for his looks and physique (what else), so would I be right in assuming he'll be the eye candy for the female Ghostbusters? Something for them to perv over and crack naughty jokes/innuendos. Wouldn't that be just as bad as having the same deal for a female character? I'm guessing of course this angle is perfectly fine and will cause no uproar by the feminists ::)
Either the whole good looking team will fancy Hemsworth accept for McCarthy, but in a hilarious ironic twist ( ::) ), Hemsworth will only be interested in McCarthy. Or McCarthy will be lusting over Hemsworth like a parasite whilst the others be all scientific and such. Or he'll go with the black female Ghostbuster to earn the movie a PC badge.
It's possible he might go against type and 'nerd it up' for the character role. I doubt it, though and, if so, it's a strong indicator this team doesn't 'get' what made the original film work so well.
Janine was a deliberate 'drone' receptionist stereotype, who played right into having a slight unrequited thing for Egon. Venkman wasn't interested in perving on her. He verbally-abused her.
Right now, it looks less like the fraternal formula, which made the original work so well, but more like a '
Hellboy'-suitable story.
'
Ghostbusters' is blue-collar humour. Guys spending their last savings on an up-start business and, by sheer luck and charisma, happen to make good. Most of the fun comes out of how ill-prepared they are while bitching about their circumstances.
I'll give it a chance, but ever since the leaked Sony E-mails indicated an absolute lack of cohearant direction about where we're heading with this, I haven't found much cause for optimism.
I just find the whole thing too gimmicky. Don't get me wrong I'm all for a new Ghostbusters and female Ghostbusters, but this just doesn't hold my interest. I hated Bridesmaids, it is up there with some of the most repugnant movies I've ever seen
New proton pack. Why do they look less advanced than the original ones? like something found in a junkyard.
Um... Wow... Yeah. I thought there was something slightly off about the stripes on the costumes, but the proton packs don't feel right, at all.
It looks like what you'd get if the Russians were trying to copy the originals.
It all looks fine.
QuoteThe Wrap reports that The Wire and Boardwalk Empire vet Michael K. Williams, Saturday Night Live star Cecily Strong, Ocean's Eleven actor Andy Garcia, and Veep standout Matt Walsh have come on board. Williams will play a character named Hawkins, while Walsh will play someone named Rourke.
http://geektyrant.com/news/michael-k-williams-cecily-strong-and-more-join-paul-feigs-ghostbusters
I watched Spy last night and it was really entertaining. Feig will do a good job on this.
Paul FeigVerified account
@paulfeig
#whattheygonnadrive
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJW6vnDWcAATGo5.jpg:large)
Not bad, but not too fond of that huge yellow light up top.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJXI1umXAAUgJrB.jpg:large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/618605601048915968/xHqVlQz1.jpg)
^ Just doesn't look right, looks like something a fan with money has made.
Looks good.
Looks great indeed, love it.
Anyone?
Sure, why not?
Kate McKinnon is nailing that Real Ghostbusters look.
Still don't like the stripes, but meh. They're stripes.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJhJVgKWUAEFNt7.jpg)
Is this a remake, reboot or sequel of sorts??
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 10, 2015, 07:04:15 PMIs this a remake, reboot or sequel of sorts??
Reboot, most likely. But seriously who cares. It's a Ghostbusters movie ::)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJk7RsLWUAAZg1K.jpg:large)
Don't like that all of them have their pants tucked into their boots.
It just looks like a fan made parody, a skit -_-
Plus I hate to say it but it also screams political correctness ::)
No, those girls look just as gay as those boys did back then in those uniforms and that car.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 10, 2015, 08:58:33 PMIt just looks like a fan made parody, a skit -_-
What do you expect? A CGI car, neopren uniforms and supermodel chicks playing the Ghostbusters?
Ghostbusters are supposed to be broken-ass everymen (everywomen, in this case), I think the "cheap" look is true to the spirit of the franchise ::)
Why the hell does Ecto-1 have a big, obnoxious flashing yellow light welded to it?
Or is it an analogy for this entire project?
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Jul 10, 2015, 09:41:15 PMWhy the hell does Ecto-1 have a big, obnoxious flashing yellow light welded to it?
Because it is a new version.
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 10, 2015, 09:40:02 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 10, 2015, 08:58:33 PMIt just looks like a fan made parody, a skit -_-
What do you expect? A CGI car, neopren uniforms and supermodel chicks playing the Ghostbusters?
Ghostbusters are supposed to be broken-ass everymen (everywomen, in this case), I think the "cheap" look is true to the spirit of the franchise ::)
Yeah I know that but it just looks forced, trying to keep up with the original movies, playing on nostalgia whilst also using concepts that don't actually work now in 2015. Have to remember the original movie came out in 84, a product of its time, and those elements don't necessarily fit in 2015 (like the car).
The same issue with the Robocop remake that obviously couldn't use the original movies notions of 80's greedy corporate America.
It looks like crap.
Or like some one already said, looks like some fan made stuff.
The car .... i hope that's version 1 and we get something closer to the original later on.
For some weird reason they lost the elbow and knee pads and got shin guards......Do the ghosts in this movie go around kicking people on the shins that this was needed?
The orange all over, i dont get it.
Hopefully this is all version 1 stuff that get's better as the film goes on.
HQ
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.collider.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F07%2Fghostbusters-melissa-mccarthy-kate-mckinnon-kristen-wiig-leslie-jones.jpg&hash=aa962416415bf423806a3de9613fe2ac68a1374c)
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 10, 2015, 09:40:02 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 10, 2015, 08:58:33 PMIt just looks like a fan made parody, a skit -_-
What do you expect?
I'm seeing fans complain that the new film looks both too much and not enough like the old film. Damned if they do and damned if they dont.
Ghostbusters fanboys are undoubtedly the f**king worst.
If its a sequel, then what I see kinda fits, it could work as a follow-on.
If its a reboot then it kinda feels lazy. Of course its hard to win because if you reboot it and its drastically different then everybody whines. If you keep it exactly the same (which they seem to have), then it does indeed feel lazy and rehashed and everyone whines again.
But bottom line it all leads to the simple conclusion...why reboot such an iconic movie in the first place? You reboot bad movies to give them a second chance, you don't reboot classic super movies that everyone adores and were massively successful.
Thusly this movie really has nowhere to go, much like the recent TMNT reboot, but I doubt this will do as well as that.
Quote from: DaddyYautja on Jul 11, 2015, 01:43:34 AM
For some weird reason they lost the elbow and knee pads and got shin guards
I knew something obvious was missing from those costumes... Couldn't quite figure out what. That's it.
Confirmed to be a lazy reboot I'm afraid -_- Spolier link warning!
As I've said before, its a no win situation because if they stray from the old formula people moan, if they stick to it, people moan. But at the end of the day it simply comes down to, why reboot such a successful classic movie in the first place.
If you reboot this with the same stuff then it will fail because it can never be anywhere near as good as the original and will always be compared to it (proven many times). What is the point?? at least with a sequel or reboot sequel you can use the same stuff with continuity and cameos and it will fit easier.
http://www.latino-review.com/news/about-that-dan-aykroyd-cameo-in-the-new-ghostbusters
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1183.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx479%2FPHLawrence%2Fba.gif&hash=2b1d74b7945959cc0515661ac3de22a1b993d971) (http://s1183.photobucket.com/user/PHLawrence/media/ba.gif.html)
The point is giving new twists to the concept and creating new stories.
I think you're mistaking a reboot for a remake ::)
See Star Trek.
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 15, 2015, 04:48:50 AM
The point is giving new twists to the concept and creating new stories.
I think you're mistaking a reboot for a remake ::)
See Star Trek.
Yes but we have already seen they're using the same ideas, to the letter, what is the point.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2015, 04:59:03 AMYes but we have already seen they're using the same ideas, to the letter, what is the point.
Wow. I thought they were going to use completely different ideas, and even opposite :o
Isn't it the point of a reboot use more or less the same ideas?
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 15, 2015, 05:01:34 AM
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2015, 04:59:03 AMYes but we have already seen they're using the same ideas, to the letter, what is the point.
Wow. I thought they were going to use completely different ideas, and even opposite :o
Isn't it the point of a reboot use more or less the same ideas?
Well to a point, but as proven with many other movies it doesn't often work, again...what is the point? If you reboot a bad movie then sure, reboot a brilliant movie...there is no point!
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2015, 05:24:19 AMWell to a point, but as proven with many other movies it doesn't often work, again...what is the point? If you reboot a bad movie then sure, reboot a brilliant movie...there is no point!
Again, tell new stories using similar ideas.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2015, 05:24:19 AM
Well to a point, but as proven with many other movies it doesn't often work, again...what is the point? If you reboot a bad movie then sure, reboot a brilliant movie...there is no point!
You really, really don't understand how it all works.
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Jul 10, 2015, 05:50:17 PM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJhJVgKWUAEFNt7.jpg
Oh my god this is like one of those alternate universes where all the people swap sexes... oh wait is that what they're doing? Well I mean they literally look like chick versions of Ray, Egon, Peter and Winston. Did they just chick up the names too. Can't help but see this as a remake if that's it.
In any case I can roll with it but Ecto-1 got downgraded. :'(
omg effin stupid, but i smell it will be fun either way :D
Ah, so reboot. Considering how much of a douche Peter Venkman was... I don't see how they can screw this up. :)
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jul 15, 2015, 12:08:38 PM
Ah, so reboot. Considering how much of a douche Peter Venkman was... I don't see how they can screw this up. :)
Pfft! sarcasm??
Errmm...who's up for this? ::)
http://www.freep.com/story/entertainment/movies/julie-hinds/2015/07/11/ghostbusters-reboot-women-comedy-sequels/29976805/
Spoiler
I wonder what changed their mind, first Aykroyd now Murray
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=123777
Quote from: ace3g on Aug 09, 2015, 05:18:14 PM
Spoiler
I wonder what changed their mind, first Aykroyd now Murray
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=123777
So...he won't do a proper sequel of any kind, but will do a cameo in this bs reboot. I think you just lost a lot of respect from the fans Bill.
Quote from: Hubbs on Aug 09, 2015, 05:49:13 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Aug 09, 2015, 05:18:14 PM
Spoiler
I wonder what changed their mind, first Aykroyd now Murray
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=123777
So...he won't do a proper sequel of any kind, but will do a cameo in this bs reboot. I think you just lost a lot of respect from the fans Bill.
You think he cares. It's well known he does what he wants to do when it comes to films. Thats why people love him. This won't change anyone's opinion of him.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Aug 09, 2015, 09:35:19 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Aug 09, 2015, 05:49:13 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Aug 09, 2015, 05:18:14 PM
Spoiler
I wonder what changed their mind, first Aykroyd now Murray
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=123777
So...he won't do a proper sequel of any kind, but will do a cameo in this bs reboot. I think you just lost a lot of respect from the fans Bill.
You think he cares. It's well known he does what he wants to do when it comes to films. Thats why people love him. This won't change anyone's opinion of him.
They probably told him that he could do whatever he wanted for the parts he is going to be in and they will write around them.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Aug 09, 2015, 09:35:19 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Aug 09, 2015, 05:49:13 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Aug 09, 2015, 05:18:14 PM
Spoiler
I wonder what changed their mind, first Aykroyd now Murray
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/KingPatel/news/?a=123777
So...he won't do a proper sequel of any kind, but will do a cameo in this bs reboot. I think you just lost a lot of respect from the fans Bill.
You think he cares. It's well known he does what he wants to do when it comes to films. Thats why people love him. This won't change anyone's opinion of him.
Oh he's definitely catching a lot of hate for this. Been seeing it everywhere.
You know I thought this was still an in-universe reboot like Jurassic World when I heard this BS about Murray. How? How do they manage to make this look worse with each piece of news? Trying to give Fant4stic a run for their money.
He did not just one, but two 'Garfield' live-actions.
If he survived that, he could survive virtually anything.
I just watched Ghostbusters 2 for the first time and couldn't be more bummed that a true third film is never happening.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkithicor.org%2Funrest%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2FGhostbusters-2-Ending-Scene.jpg&hash=6d4e167c8c511dd38a19cadf3fbea38c3293fc70)
If you can get it to work for your system, find a version of the recent game they did on PC. It's notable for being the last project the original cast reprised their roles for, voice-wise and is actually a fairly good story which manages to tie in a lot of former story elements - including the librarian ghost, believe it or not! Explores exactly what Ivo Shandor was meant to have been up to with his architecture and stuff.
A couple of parts which are difficult, but it's worth playing. Feels like a genuine third film and, perhaps one day, it's possible for someone to use the audio files to adapt it into an actual legitimate CGI thrid film.
Make sure to play the amusing answerphone messages while back at base. :)
Quote from: Gilfryd on Aug 11, 2015, 10:19:21 PM
I just watched Ghostbusters 2 for the first time and couldn't be more bummed that a true third film is never happening.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkithicor.org%2Funrest%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2FGhostbusters-2-Ending-Scene.jpg&hash=6d4e167c8c511dd38a19cadf3fbea38c3293fc70)
The first time?! But yes I feel your pain, instead we get a cheap gimmick which Murray is apparently starring in! :o ::) -_-
Definately agree with checking out the Ghostbusters game. Really does feel like a third film the way the story ties into events from the films and all the original cast are back. Its also got some really funny dialogue in there if you pay attention during the levels. I loved it.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn03.cdn.justjared.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F08%2Fhemsworth-ghostcost%2Fchris-hemsworth-ghostbusters-set-costume-01.jpg&hash=29030bb46b9aaa9bdec85fb520615d5e65ba697c)
Finally, a cock!
So he's the geeky, nerdy Rick Moranis equivalent who is actually dead sexy but probably doesn't realise it.
Ha-ha-ha
::)
Quote from: Hubbs on Aug 18, 2015, 06:18:17 AM
So he's the geeky, nerdy Rick Moranis equivalent who is actually dead sexy but probably doesn't realise it.
Ha-ha-ha
::)
This project keeps shooting itself in the foot with every single publicity photo. :-\
Can just imagine the production meeting which got him hired for this. So f**king predictable it hurts.
I'm not into dykes or feminist... that photo screams of both.
If they are all ok with cameos, then they should have just made this movie earlier... RIP Egon
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ernie-hudson-appear-new-ghostbusters-824931?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+THRComicCon+%28The+Hollywood+Reporter+-+Heat+Vision%29
Paul Feig Verified account
@paulfeig
It's a wrap on Ghostbusters!!!
Does anyone actually want this movie to be made?
I hear all three original Ghostbusters are making cameos >:( bloody sell outs.
Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudson wanting in is not selling out, it's wanting to reclaim that old glory.
Nope, it's being offered massive paychecks. Hudson was against this reboot for flips sake, now he's in it! Money talks, if there's a steady paycheck in it, Hudson will do anything you say.
They're clearly trying to lure in the original fanbase with these cameos.
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 20, 2015, 02:23:33 PMNope, it's being offered massive paychecks. Hudson was against this reboot for flips sake, now he's in it! Money talks, if there's a steady paycheck in it, Hudson will do anything you say.
Isn't that how working works? You act, they pay you? ::) I see nothing weird here.
Yeah, I won't judge them for getting paid work. Heck, look at a lot of the crap Lance Henriksen has openly admitted to taking for money! He's still a great guy in his own right. :)
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 20, 2015, 02:23:33 PMNope, it's being offered massive paychecks. Hudson was against this reboot for flips sake, now he's in it! Money talks, if there's a steady paycheck in it, Hudson will do anything you say.
And what's bad about that? It's not like he's funding ISIS with his paycheck or anything.
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 20, 2015, 02:23:33 PMThey're clearly trying to lure in the original fanbase with these cameos.
And what's so bad about that? People who liked Ghostbusters movies might like to watch a new Ghostbusters movie.
The fact you're saying "uh, this movie's gonna stink because they're only girls!" it's just an überstupid argument.
How dare they make movies? Don't you know they're making MONEY?!? Damn movies.
Yep that's the old glory I'm talking about, a whole lotta Benjamin's. :)
Right, because having the original stars in the movie as silly cameos isn't an obvious ploy to try and get the fanboy fanbase on board after the virtually massive all round negative response to this movie online.
The fact that Hudson was against it at first and is now in it, is also not exactly a good sign. We all know it's about money but just doing something so obviously for the money and nothing else (like actual love and respect for the project), reflects badly on the movie.
The movies going to die... so why do you care?
Quote from: whiterabbit on Sep 21, 2015, 05:00:21 AM
The movies going to die... so why do you care?
It could of been so much more.
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 21, 2015, 04:00:24 AMRight, because having the original stars in the movie as silly cameos isn't an obvious ploy to try and get the fanboy fanbase on board after the virtually massive all round negative response to this movie online.
The fact that Hudson was against it at first and is now in it, is also not exactly a good sign. We all know it's about money but just doing something so obviously for the money and nothing else (like actual love and respect for the project), reflects badly on the movie.
The fact is this is a desperate move because of the f**king stupid "massive all round negative response" to the reboot. I see people not open to the reboot thing simply because it's an all-female cast. Probably if they had launched a new Star Trek or Star Wars saga with an all-female cast, the uproar would have been just as negative.
You're criticizing the fact they're trying to panderize to the fans simply because you started screaming an irrational "WE HATE GIRLS!!" stupid complaint from the beginning. If you're saying the reboot doesn't make sense and they're desperate, you first should take a look at yourself and your points of view.
Yet Another Original Ghostbusters Star Will Appear In The New Movie!
CanoeShowbiz Verified account
@JamShowbiz
#Ghostbusters reboot a giant reunion. #AnniePotts has signed up too: http://jam.canoe.com/Movies/2015/09/21/22554033-wenn-story.html ...
You know what would be awesome; if half way through this shitty movie the old cast basically bumps the new cast da f**k out of the way and takes over the movie. ~ducks head
and yep, didn't see the movie but I already am assuming it will be shitty.
I bet it'll rock.
Quote from: Magegg on Sep 21, 2015, 09:07:32 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 21, 2015, 04:00:24 AMRight, because having the original stars in the movie as silly cameos isn't an obvious ploy to try and get the fanboy fanbase on board after the virtually massive all round negative response to this movie online.
The fact that Hudson was against it at first and is now in it, is also not exactly a good sign. We all know it's about money but just doing something so obviously for the money and nothing else (like actual love and respect for the project), reflects badly on the movie.
The fact is this is a desperate move because of the f**king stupid "massive all round negative response" to the reboot. I see people not open to the reboot thing simply because it's an all-female cast. Probably if they had launched a new Star Trek or Star Wars saga with an all-female cast, the uproar would have been just as negative.
You're criticizing the fact they're trying to panderize to the fans simply because you started screaming an irrational "WE HATE GIRLS!!" stupid complaint from the beginning. If you're saying the reboot doesn't make sense and they're desperate, you first should take a look at yourself and your points of view.
When have I ever said 'we hate girls'?
I don't dislike the idea of female Ghostbusters, but simply gender swapping the entire team with identical female character equivalents is a lame gimmick. Then gender swapping Annie Potts character into a hunky bloke is even more lame and pathetic (so much for eradicating sexism in this movie huh).
And yes, they are pandering to the fanbase with these cameos, but it won't work.
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 22, 2015, 03:59:45 AMWhen have I ever said 'we hate girls'?
I don't dislike the idea of female Ghostbusters, but simply gender swapping the entire team with identical female character equivalents is a lame gimmick. Then gender swapping Annie Potts character into a hunky bloke is even more lame and pathetic (so much for eradicating sexism in this movie huh).
Yeah, because you've proven one and a thousand times you don't even know these new characters.
The other complain would be "but Ghostbusters were Venkman, Spengler and the others"! I think it would be an even worse idea recasting all those great actors.
So, they're creating new characters to fill their roles? I think that's fair, but I have no doubt these new girls are going to be very different to the original Ghosbusters. Call it a gimmick or whatever, but I don't think there should be a rule that states Ghostbusters can't be an all female team, that's just last century thinking.
http://collider.com/ghostbusters-reboot-paul-feig-tells-haters-to-go-f**k-themselves/ (http://collider.com/ghostbusters-reboot-paul-feig-tells-haters-to-go-f**k-themselves/)
When the director breaks it's usually a sign that the bullshit hate is grounded in reality. Honestly though, is the hate because the women are not hot superbabes? Societal definitions of beauty do exist.
I think it's more to do with misogyny, as well as fans of the originals not wanting it made in the first place.
I'm not bothered, I'll wait for reviews, if it's good I'll watch it.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Sep 24, 2015, 10:55:00 PM
I think it's more to do with misogyny, as well as fans of the originals not wanting it made in the first place.
I'm not bothered, I'll wait for reviews, if it's good I'll watch it.
Yea I get that too, being that they appear as "working" women. It's kind of reminiscent of the current political atmosphere.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Sep 25, 2015, 12:21:47 AM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Sep 24, 2015, 10:55:00 PM
I think it's more to do with misogyny, as well as fans of the originals not wanting it made in the first place.
I'm not bothered, I'll wait for reviews, if it's good I'll watch it.
Yea I get that too, being that they appear as "working" women. It's kind of reminiscent of the current political atmosphere.
Exactly. The film seem's like bad timing. We're going through a cultural change in regards to gender and this has rocked the boat hard. I hvae alot of trust in Feig but disappointed in him for this reaction.
The problem is the whole idea just feels like a political move to almost force this cultural change that's happening, as mentioned by hfeldhaus.
It doesn't feel like a movie being made for the love of it, the love of the original franchise, using great new ideas and concepts to further the whole thing.
It just feels like a political move, propaganda, pushing an agenda, it doesn't feel like a true movie. The cameos are clearly just to grab the attention of the older original fanboy base.
The fact they are using such an iconic, much loved and perfect movie franchise makes it even worse! If they were using a bad movie that could use a reboot, then fine.
Why remake a classic in this way at all?
Surely they could have done it as a sequel or something similiar yet unrelated with a different name.
Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 25, 2015, 04:48:56 PM
The problem is the whole idea just feels like a political move to almost force this cultural change that's happening, as mentioned by hfeldhaus.
It doesn't feel like a movie being made for the love of it, the love of the original franchise, using great new ideas and concepts to further the whole thing.
It just feels like a political move, propaganda, pushing an agenda, it doesn't feel like a true movie. The cameos are clearly just to grab the attention of the older original fanboy base.
The fact they are using such an iconic, much loved and perfect movie franchise makes it even worse! If they were using a bad movie that could use a reboot, then fine.
Yeah- Because girls = political move.
There aren't working girls or scientist girls in the world, they're all political decoys.
Come on, dude, this is XXI century...
Paul Feig
✔
@paulfeig
Gang, trying to keep surprises but this is about to leak, so I'll tell you myself: the awesome Sigourney Weaver is going to be in our movie!
10:17 AM - 25 Sep 2015
What is the point of these cameos? What?!
They're not going to make up for this lazy reboot, the key word for all of this being...lazy.
They clearly should of made a sequel with the old team passing the torch to a new team. Win win situation, nostalgia with the old team and a new team for a new generation.
I think every body would have been fine with that, even if the new team was all women.
The reason so many are angry is because this is a reboot, just look what happened to other recent iconic reboots like 'Robocop'.
The joke of it is, they now have all the original cast in with cameos, so why didn't they just make a straight sequel with them??!! Why do these actors not want to make a sequel but are happy to do pointless cameos in a reboot??
You'll get people signing on for short cameos. It's meaningless and gives their profile a short boost. If the property fails, their personal reputation won't take a hit.
When you're asking them to invest some serious time and effort in a main character, it's different... They start thinking about the actual quality of the script. If they think it's crap, then they know their inclusion will be more associated with it.
Respectful credit to Adam Baldwin for being above that apathy, when it came to 'Requiem'.
As for political correctness, I agree with Hubbs that the casting demographic looks dubious, at best. It's like they're reversing the roles for the sake of it, not because it adds anything to the story, except failing to understand why those roles succeeded in the first place - what we know and have seen of Hemsworth is strongly pointing to this. We could be wrong in those assumptions, of course, but it's as was said above: He seems to be coming across as a 'hunky nerd' stereotype.
That's what people seem to be objecting to here. The fact this all seems so horridly predictable and formulaic, when the original film is so iconic because it broke the proverbial mould for comedy.
I certainly wouldn't object to an all-female team, but the way they're going about it just seems destined to fail - and when you feel that way about something, you wish to high heaven that they weren't doing it with a franchise which is so beloved. Everything I've heard about this, so far, makes me think they could have easily just made it something completely original.
And, sadly, those leaked Sony E-mails which referred to the plans for this series, only confirm this. They aren't doing this because the scripts are necessarily any good. They're doing it because they want not just one sequel, but a spin-off, just to make money. That's arse-about-face. They should get a script which is good enough to conceivably make a profit and then finance it.
And let's look at the female characters... There are a number of actresses I could think of who have excellent comedy timing, but none of these ones strike me that way. So, again, yet another factor which feels uninspiring about this particular production.
And, yes, I feel this way about the spin-off, too, which is already in production and has male leads.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 26, 2015, 11:46:54 AM
You'll get people signing on for short cameos. It's meaningless and gives their profile a short boost. If the property fails, their personal reputation won't take a hit.
When you're asking them to invest some serious time and effort in a main character, it's different... They start thinking about the actual quality of the script. If they think it's crap, then they know their inclusion will be more associated with it.
Respectful credit to Adam Baldwin for being above that apathy, when it came to 'Requiem'.
As for political correctness, I agree with Hubbs that the casting demographic looks dubious, at best. It's like they're reversing the roles for the sake of it, not because it adds anything to the story, except failing to understand why those roles succeeded in the first place - what we know and have seen of Hemsworth is strongly pointing to this. We could be wrong in those assumptions, of course, but it's as was said above: He seems to be coming across as a 'hunky nerd' stereotype.
That's what people seem to be objecting to here. The fact this all seems so horridly predictable and formulaic, when the original film is so iconic because it broke the proverbial mould for comedy.
I certainly wouldn't object to an all-female team, but the way they're going about it just seems destined to fail - and when you feel that way about something, you wish to high heaven that they weren't doing it with a franchise which is so beloved. Everything I've heard about this, so far, makes me think they could have easily just made it something completely original.
And, sadly, those leaked Sony E-mails which referred to the plans for this series, only confirm this. They aren't doing this because the scripts are necessarily any good. They're doing it because they want not just one sequel, but a spin-off, just to make money. That's arse-about-face. They should get a script which is good enough to conceivably make a profit and then finance it.
And let's look at the female characters... There are a number of actresses I could think of who have excellent comedy timing, but none of these ones strike me that way. So, again, yet another factor which feels uninspiring about this particular production.
And, yes, I feel this way about the spin-off, too, which is already in production and has male leads.
Yes! +1 :)
How many times do hear about a studio gearing up to make a bunch of sequels before the first movie has even come out. No one is interested in actual quality these days, they just want a fast food franchise they can spin out and make a quick gazillion Dollars. Its like they want an instant Star Wars universe without any of the hard work and universe building. They just want it all out quick quick to ride the bandwagon.
And yes, if your rebooting, at least try and be your own thing, do your own thing, there's no point just redoing the original film. The gender swapping is clearly their rather lazy attempt to try and fool people into thinking its a fresh outlook, something new, maybe even trying to fool themselves. But in all honesty it really does just look like a lame PC move to look progressive, as
Xenomorphine said they don't understand what made the characters work in the first place.
Its like gender swapping Ripley into a bloke, easy to do, would feel 'new', but ultimately you lose the whole essence of that character.
The Hemsworth casting seems to make a joke out of their own little progressive PC move, which they haven't picked up on apparently.
Of course I could be wrong but everything so far really points to predictable stereotypical fail again. The cameos just feel like damage control already, as if the original stars will somehow fool us into thinking its a real Ghostbusters movie, or a good one.
Quote from: ace3g on Sep 25, 2015, 11:22:14 PM
Paul Feig
✔
@paulfeig
Gang, trying to keep surprises but this is about to leak, so I'll tell you myself: the awesome Sigourney Weaver is going to be in our movie!
10:17 AM - 25 Sep 2015
I'm guessing this'll be no different than her non-roles in Chappie, Cabin in the Woods, Paul, etc.
Hollywood Reporter Verified account
@THR
Rick Moranis won't be making a cameo in #Ghostbusters:"It makes no sense to me." http://thr.cm/zvGCrj
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQuykQiU8AAyUJS.jpg:large)
Quote from: ace3g on Oct 07, 2015, 11:04:23 PM
Hollywood Reporter Verified account
@THR
Rick Moranis won't be making a cameo in #Ghostbusters:"It makes no sense to me." http://thr.cm/zvGCrj
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CQuykQiU8AAyUJS.jpg:large)
So when will he be getting labelled and branded a misogynist?
http://mobile.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/11/17/us/ap-us-obit-gross.html?_r=5&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com
Michael Gross, Who Created 'Ghostbusters' Logo, Dies at 70
https://twitter.com/BDisgusting/status/670044410806071296
They need to put in Vince Vaughn, Shia as Louis, Teddy Crews, The Rock, put in some funny guys like these dudes.
http://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/charles-dance-a-late-confirmation-for-paul-feigs-ghostbusters-369
CHARLES DANCE A LATE CONFIRMATION FOR PAUL FEIG'S GHOSTBUSTERS
Cool news! :)
CLEMENS IN THE MOVIE
I KNOW RIGHT?!
Hopefully he'll survive a little longer. :P
http://bloody-disgusting.com/images/3373309/official-ghostbusters-photo-intros-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig-kate-mckinnon-and-leslie-jones/
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Dec 16, 2015, 02:08:03 PM
http://bloody-disgusting.com/images/3373309/official-ghostbusters-photo-intros-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig-kate-mckinnon-and-leslie-jones/
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CWWjkolXAAAOIZR.jpg:large)
Sorry, was fannying around on my mobile at that point.
THIS LOOKS SHIT
Looks like some kind of theme park show.
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 16, 2015, 03:47:58 PM
Looks like some kind of theme park show.
It... Kind of does.
It strikes me like a decent 'cosplayer' group getting together and doing their own modern take on Zuul rooftop scene: Great props, but no true willing sense of disbelief being conveyed.
Quote from: x-M-x on Dec 16, 2015, 03:12:37 PM
THIS LOOKS SHIT
Yeah, I tried to have an open mind, but damn does this film look bad.
Looks great, can't wait to watch :D
(https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/ghostbusters-poster-kate-mckinnon.jpeg?quality=75&strip=color&w=1100)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2-2.timeinc.net%2Fpeople%2Fi%2F2015%2Fnews%2F151221%2Fghostbusters-435.jpg&hash=a0c2e983d9a9e12b8ec44d9606e34258a41ce438)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn-img.instyle.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2F480xflex%2Fpublic%2F1450365841%2F121715-ghoastbusters-poster.jpg%3Fitok%3DoIMwbQ-G&hash=506295c488b57f3299acf351b3079155f3742f1b)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ew.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fi%2F2015%2F12%2F17%2Fghostbusters.jpg&hash=d2a0d60546776d8674855c63341970d2a0d34ea1)
This is going to be great.
Quote from: ace3g on Dec 17, 2015, 07:42:10 PM
(https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/ghostbusters-poster-kate-mckinnon.jpeg?quality=75&strip=color&w=1100)
http://img2-2.timeinc.net/people/i/2015/news/151221/ghostbusters-435.jpg
http://cdn-img.instyle.com/sites/default/files/styles/480xflex/public/1450365841/121715-ghoastbusters-poster.jpg?itok=oIMwbQ-G
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ew.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fi%2F2015%2F12%2F17%2Fghostbusters.jpg&hash=d2a0d60546776d8674855c63341970d2a0d34ea1)
Those have to be the first teaser images which actually look decent.
Even if all the effective stuff is actually done in post-production, but still...
So apparently one of the female stars has been tweeting some pretty risqué stuff today, I've just seen and heard. Definitely not a good move.
Profanity laden tweets for the last 5 hours I've read.
SURE SIGN OF QUALITY CASTING.
If you follow/know her you'd know she's been tweeting like that since she had twitter. Trace back through the tweets and find the guy who was calling her a gorilla. Thats where it started. Is it unprofessional to respond, maybe, but remember the cast have had to put up with it since they were announced.
As for her behaviour it has nothing to do with the quality of the film.
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
It doesn't mean as much as you think. Especially with this film most people have their minds made up. She could have taken it on the chin but thats not use style. Ben Affleck is good example, fanboys were crushing him when he was announced as Batman but now he's the main draw for most people. Still respect her for stepping up though. It must have been hell for the cast these past few months.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Dec 19, 2015, 05:40:24 AM
It doesn't mean as much as you think. Especially with this film most people have their minds made up. She could have taken it on the chin but thats not use style. Ben Affleck is good example, fanboys were crushing him when he was announced as Batman but now he's the main draw for most people. Still respect her for stepping up though. It must have been hell for the cast these past few months.
Meh, I disagree, they are professional people, they get paid well, they should know how to handle this kinda thing.
In the real world, if you work with the general public, you often get a lot of sh*t, but you never take it personally and never react. You ignore it and move on, if you react in a bad way, you could find yourself out of a job very quickly and easily. Bottom line you just gotta be the bigger person and ignore it, that may sounds weak but (in the real world) if you value your job, you have to.
In the real world if your work with the public it's normally a respected position where you wouldn't be racially insulted, and these tweets were personal. It's a completely different level and it can't be compared to what us norms do, so why should she act like it. She isn't going to lose her job over it, if anything people will love her more.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Dec 19, 2015, 06:26:22 AM
In the real world if your work with the public it's normally a respected position where you wouldn't be racially insulted, and these tweets were personal. It's a completely different level and it can't be compared to what us norms do, so why should she act like it. She isn't going to lose her job over it, if anything people will love her more.
Dude, really, if you work with the public chances are you'll get verbally abused in every manner trust me, sometimes assaulted also, trust me. It can be extremely personal, but you have to be the bigger person, if you react badly chances are you'll lose your job no matter what position you have (unless you have absolute proof from witnesses/CCTV or you are defending yourself).
And that's my point, she won't lose her job exactly, rich movie stars have nothing to worry about, hence they should behave better, they are practically role models to many and have a responsibility (like sports stars). Just because she is rich and famous doesn't give her the right to act badly or say whatever she wants, especially on social media for all to see, including kids. Most regular people (us) would lose our jobs, so we have to behave and act better.
LOL, she was probably drunk XDD
And just because she is rich and famous, it doesn't give people the right to insult her like they have and without any response - especially racially motivated insults. I don't believe anyone should have to take it on the chin. Not when it comes to being personally attacked.
The sense of entitlement that this world seems to think it has. "I know, this actor is in a film that I'm pissed off about them recasting as all-female. Oh now, what a diaster. I'm angry at this. I'm going to insult her. Oh, and she's black? Then I'll just throw in some comment about the colour of her skin too. That'll do a treat."
f**king idiots.
Yeah, trolling and bullying an actor just for doing a movie, that's really douchey.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Dec 21, 2015, 08:58:59 AM
And just because she is rich and famous, it doesn't give people the right to insult her like they have and without any response - especially raced motivated insults. I don't believe anyone should have to take it on the chin. Not when it comes to being personally attacked.
The sense of entitlement that this world seems to think it has. "I know, this actor is in a film that I'm pissed off about them recasting as all-female. Oh now, what a diaster. I'm angry at this. I'm going to insult her. Oh, and she's black? Then I'll just throw in some comment about the colour of her skin too. That'll do a treat."
f**king idiots.
The amount of vitriol these actresses have been receiving is disgusting. It's just a f**king movie at the end of the day.
Can't blame her for responding in the manner she did, though I'm not shocked to see some use it as an excuse to throw further shade.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ew.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fi%2F2015%2F12%2F23%2Fhaunting-ew-0-ghostbusters_0.jpg&hash=27489ed9f292973cdf39b7e827aa1a5d9ae2119f)
christ... this is gonna BOMB lol
I don't think I've ever cared any less about anything, than this embarrassment. At least Rebel 'I'm fat, it's funny because I say it' Wilson isn't in it
People are just assholes. The main reason they're being picked on is because they're not ultra hot sexy women. However that tweet call out didn't help any with racial stereotypes. A large black women using the term bitch isn't helping. Then again that is what they do... hey just pointing out the obvious.
Still I can't help but think that this movie is going to blow major chunks. It looks god awful... but hell just look at what they did with the posters, they sexy'd up what you could see with photoshop and focused on the tech. Seriously, any of you who think those were good posters should feel a little ashamed but it worked didn't it.
Deep inside, I think the movie will not be that bad. Call it hollywood magic but it'll be as decent as Jurassic World was. :laugh:
Jurassic World was awful
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Dec 30, 2015, 01:23:54 AM
Jurassic World was awful
Yea awful in the tune of 1.6 billion. Meaning tons of people had to have liked it.
My only gripe with the outfits is that all of them have their pants tucked into their boots.
Paul Feig has a good track record with McCarthy and Kristen Wiig.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Dec 30, 2015, 01:14:29 AM
People are just assholes. The main reason they're being picked on is because they're not ultra hot sexy women. However that tweet call out didn't help any with racial stereotypes. A large black women using the term bitch isn't helping. Then again that is what they do... hey just pointing out the obvious.
Still I can't help but think that this movie is going to blow major chunks. It looks god awful... but hell just look at what they did with the posters, they sexy'd up what you could see with photoshop and focused on the tech. Seriously, any of you who think those were good posters should feel a little ashamed but it worked didn't it.
Deep inside, I think the movie will not be that bad. Call it hollywood magic but it'll be as decent as Jurassic World was. :laugh:
No it isn't! that would actually be even worse! Its because the whole thing is a lazy idea, coupled with the fact they got virtually the entire original cast for cameos! Its not even a passing of the torch type scenario for snots sake.
Baloney. How often you see a "hot" girl get the shit that they're getting. The general population that's being cruel is being so based on appearance. If they were all in their early 20's and totally confirming to preconceived definitions of beauty the movie would be made fun of. Not the actors. However this is also why I think the movie will be better than what I'm expecting.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Dec 30, 2015, 05:19:44 AM
Baloney. How often you see a "hot" girl get the shit that they're getting. The general population that's being cruel is being so based on appearance. If they were all in their early 20's and totally confirming to preconceived definitions of beauty the movie would be made fun of. Not the actors. However this is also why I think the movie will be better than what I'm expecting.
Well I speak for myself, had they been super slim and sexy, like say...Sofia Vergara, then it would of been terrible (in fact I'm amazed they didn't cast her). The fact these women are more 'normal' looking is a small plus point (as the original guys were just average blue collar types), but the entire notion of remaking the original but simply gender swapping everyone is pathetic.
:laugh:
I don't think I've ever seen the word slim used to describe Sofia Vergara...
Quote from: whiterabbit on Dec 30, 2015, 01:35:02 AM
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Dec 30, 2015, 01:23:54 AM
Jurassic World was awful
Yea awful in the tune of 1.6 billion. Meaning tons of people had to have liked it.
Transformers
I mean, Jurassic World was nowhere near as bad as the Transformers movies
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Dec 31, 2015, 02:37:34 AM
I mean, Jurassic World was nowhere near as bad as the Transformers movies
Yea I know what you mean but a lot of people must have liked that movie too. So yea... money doesn't equate good at all. :P
psh i loved jurassic world! it feels like theres only two types of of movie opnions today "it was good or it was terrible"
Quote from: frenchfries on Dec 31, 2015, 07:33:21 PM
psh i loved jurassic world! it feels like theres only two types of of movie opnions today "it was good or it was terrible"
Hey that's just like politics. I wonder if there's any relationship.
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
That's not what I said. What I said was that there are those who are going to make stupid comments like this. And that with the amount she's being paid she should act like an adult and look at it for what it is...it's someone's words. If they're not true then it shouldn't matter to her. They're just words. I've worked in the general public for almost 20 years of my life and had several people call me far worse than a gorilla or a ni**er. And yet I can't act irrationally and throat punch every person that calls me a name. Or spits in my face for that matter. It's a matter of being an adult. I get paid much less and have to "bite my tongue" on a daily basis. It's a matter of public decency called professionalism.
Do I agree with what was said to her... No. Do I agree that people should be allowed to say what they want because we have "freedom of speech"... no. But that's reality. And if she's not a big enough person to realize that they are just words and that not all people are friendly then obviously she's got a long road ahead of her.
I was in law enforcement for over 12 years with a spotless record. 8 of those yrs were with a federal agency. In recent there have been several turbulent cases involving officers accused of racism. Some the officer was wrong others the suspect was wrong. That doesn't mean that all police officers are evil or corrupt. It also doesn't mean that all african Americans are gun toting thugs or druggies. Yet because of the actions of a few the vast majority has to suffer the consequences. Racial turbulence is just as much a part of today as it was in the 60s.
My point is that whether the comments directed toward her were related to the film or not is irrelevant. Her comment (though not uncalled for) was ill placed and made it about the film. She stated she didn't care what anyone thought she's a ghostbuster. That makes it about the film. And no matter how bad it pissed her off, she's an upscale actress. She's supposed to be considered a pillar of the community. I.E. a role model. You can't be a role model if you can't even control your emotions. Actors have been the focus of media attacks for years yet you don't see Christian bale, Mel Gibson, or Russell Crowe ranting on their social media sites.
Just be professional and look at it for what it is. Part of the job. If it bothers her that bad....BLOCK THE POST
I think we have found this years Fantastic 4.
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
That's not what I said. What I said was that there are those who are going to make stupid comments like this. And that with the amount she's being paid she should act like an adult and look at it for what it is...it's someone's words. If they're not true then it shouldn't matter to her. They're just words. I've worked in the general public for almost 20 years of my life and had several people call me far worse than a gorilla or a ni**er. And yet I can't act irrationally and throat punch every person that calls me a name. Or spits in my face for that matter. It's a matter of being an adult. I get paid much less and have to "bite my tongue" on a daily basis. It's a matter of public decency called professionalism.
Do I agree with what was said to her... No. Do I agree that people should be allowed to say what they want because we have "freedom of speech"... no. But that's reality. And if she's not a big enough person to realize that they are just words and that not all people are friendly then obviously she's got a long road ahead of her.
I was in law enforcement for over 12 years with a spotless record. 8 of those yrs were with a federal agency. In recent there have been several turbulent cases involving officers accused of racism. Some the officer was wrong others the suspect was wrong. That doesn't mean that all police officers are evil or corrupt. It also doesn't mean that all african Americans are gun toting thugs or druggies. Yet because of the actions of a few the vast majority has to suffer the consequences. Racial turbulence is just as much a part of today as it was in the 60s.
My point is that whether the comments directed toward her were related to the film or not is irrelevant. Her comment (though not uncalled for) was ill placed and made it about the film. She stated she didn't care what anyone thought she's a ghostbuster. That makes it about the film. And no matter how bad it pissed her off, she's an upscale actress. She's supposed to be considered a pillar of the community. I.E. a role model. You can't be a role model if you can't even control your emotions. Actors have been the focus of media attacks for years yet you don't see Christian bale, Mel Gibson, or Russell Crowe ranting on their social media sites.
Just be professional and look at it for what it is. Part of the job. If it bothers her that bad....BLOCK THE POST
You forget, this is the entertainment business. Plus everybody is different and some take public opinion too seriously. If you think you're better then her because you have tougher skin, great for you. Other people will tell the truth using colorful metaphors.
Quote from: Wrecktangle on Jan 04, 2016, 08:17:31 PM
I think we have found this years Fantastic 4.
Yea but which one. The one we thought was shit or that one that was absolute shit? :P
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
That's not what I said. What I said was that there are those who are going to make stupid comments like this. And that with the amount she's being paid she should act like an adult and look at it for what it is...it's someone's words. If they're not true then it shouldn't matter to her. They're just words. I've worked in the general public for almost 20 years of my life and had several people call me far worse than a gorilla or a ni**er. And yet I can't act irrationally and throat punch every person that calls me a name. Or spits in my face for that matter. It's a matter of being an adult. I get paid much less and have to "bite my tongue" on a daily basis. It's a matter of public decency called professionalism.
Do I agree with what was said to her... No. Do I agree that people should be allowed to say what they want because we have "freedom of speech"... no. But that's reality. And if she's not a big enough person to realize that they are just words and that not all people are friendly then obviously she's got a long road ahead of her.
I was in law enforcement for over 12 years with a spotless record. 8 of those yrs were with a federal agency. In recent there have been several turbulent cases involving officers accused of racism. Some the officer was wrong others the suspect was wrong. That doesn't mean that all police officers are evil or corrupt. It also doesn't mean that all african Americans are gun toting thugs or druggies. Yet because of the actions of a few the vast majority has to suffer the consequences. Racial turbulence is just as much a part of today as it was in the 60s.
My point is that whether the comments directed toward her were related to the film or not is irrelevant. Her comment (though not uncalled for) was ill placed and made it about the film. She stated she didn't care what anyone thought she's a ghostbuster. That makes it about the film. And no matter how bad it pissed her off, she's an upscale actress. She's supposed to be considered a pillar of the community. I.E. a role model. You can't be a role model if you can't even control your emotions. Actors have been the focus of media attacks for years yet you don't see Christian bale, Mel Gibson, or Russell Crowe ranting on their social media sites.
Just be professional and look at it for what it is. Part of the job. If it bothers her that bad....BLOCK THE POST
The everyday Joe can't talk back because they will be fired, it's not about professionalism. That doesn't matter in the entertainment industry. Why the hell do people compare working in the public sector with working in the public eye?
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
That's not what I said. What I said was that there are those who are going to make stupid comments like this. And that with the amount she's being paid she should act like an adult and look at it for what it is...it's someone's words. If they're not true then it shouldn't matter to her. They're just words. I've worked in the general public for almost 20 years of my life and had several people call me far worse than a gorilla or a ni**er. And yet I can't act irrationally and throat punch every person that calls me a name. Or spits in my face for that matter. It's a matter of being an adult. I get paid much less and have to "bite my tongue" on a daily basis. It's a matter of public decency called professionalism.
Do I agree with what was said to her... No. Do I agree that people should be allowed to say what they want because we have "freedom of speech"... no. But that's reality. And if she's not a big enough person to realize that they are just words and that not all people are friendly then obviously she's got a long road ahead of her.
I was in law enforcement for over 12 years with a spotless record. 8 of those yrs were with a federal agency. In recent there have been several turbulent cases involving officers accused of racism. Some the officer was wrong others the suspect was wrong. That doesn't mean that all police officers are evil or corrupt. It also doesn't mean that all african Americans are gun toting thugs or druggies. Yet because of the actions of a few the vast majority has to suffer the consequences. Racial turbulence is just as much a part of today as it was in the 60s.
My point is that whether the comments directed toward her were related to the film or not is irrelevant. Her comment (though not uncalled for) was ill placed and made it about the film. She stated she didn't care what anyone thought she's a ghostbuster. That makes it about the film. And no matter how bad it pissed her off, she's an upscale actress. She's supposed to be considered a pillar of the community. I.E. a role model. You can't be a role model if you can't even control your emotions. Actors have been the focus of media attacks for years yet you don't see Christian bale, Mel Gibson, or Russell Crowe ranting on their social media sites.
Just be professional and look at it for what it is. Part of the job. If it bothers her that bad....BLOCK THE POST
The everyday Joe can't talk back because they will be fired, it's not about professionalism. That doesn't matter in the entertainment industry. Why the hell do people compare working in the public sector with working in the public eye?
So what you're saying is if someone calls you a name just act how you feel about it? Sure why not just turn in our guns for clubs and we can go back to dragging our knuckles across the ground too. Maybe trade in our lighters for flint rocks while we're at it. How is the entertainment industry any different than the average joe? Last time I checked they weren't created or bred in a special lab. They themselves were average Joes at one point. And your point of view is basically saying just because they are in the entertainment industry they can react how they want. So in comparison if someone calls Wesley snipes a crook because he was charged with tax evasion and he pulls out a gun and shoots them it's ok cause hey....he's in the entertainment industry. He should be allowed to act in any manner he wants and not be held accountable for his actions. Or that he should be judged less harshly because he is in the entertainment industry. Because millionaires have it so bad they just can't handle the stress of someone calling them names. [emoji24]
As far as public sector vs public eye.. law enforcement especially federal law enforcement falls under the same "public eye" as you dub it. Sure we don't carry the same popularity factor but we are judged with extreme scrutiny in the "eyes of the public". Meaning we're expected to act a certain way and carry ourselves a certain way. That is the point I was getting at with the professionalism statement.
Furthermore look at her response. Look at how she spelled out the text and the context in which she used it. Oh yes....fine argument there. Prove to me that you're not the trash you were being accused of by responding in the exact way that trash would have responded. If you're not a thug fine... but when you respond like one don't expect me to believe that your not.
If the proverbial shoe fits wear it.
The argument is moot at this point because it's all a matter of opinions. I wasn't trying to offend anyone just making the statement that for the amount of money they get paid they should act accordingly. When certain actresses icloud accounts were hacked (Jennifer Lawrence pics) you didn't see them going around blasting profanity everywhere. Sure they were upset but they handled it in a way that was appropriate.
I'm not saying they're any different, I'm saying the industry they work in is different.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jan 04, 2016, 09:00:26 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 08:01:17 PM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jan 04, 2016, 07:11:43 PM
Quote from: pred169 on Jan 04, 2016, 04:54:44 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 19, 2015, 05:20:10 AM
I agree, but I'm afraid the actress should be above all that, be mature and ignore it. Don't allow business to become personal. Having a huge profanity laden rant against fans on twitter isn't gonna help her or the movie, in fact it will probably make things much worse. Judging by reactions to her tweets it has made things worse.
Not to mention what she's getting paid. I mean if I'm getting paid anywhere from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars just to ACT. I'm afraid id be able to control my rants and profanity. For that amount of money they should be much more professional than that.
Law enforcement officers are subjected to degrading and profane verbal abuse everyday. And yet they keep their composure. They dont have a choice in the matter. If they act as she has they lose their job.
So my point is just because people are degrading the movie that doesn't give her the right to act like a child with no self restraint.
The comments had nothing to do with the movie. You think that just because she's been paid a large amount she should accept being called a n****r or a monkey.
That's not what I said. What I said was that there are those who are going to make stupid comments like this. And that with the amount she's being paid she should act like an adult and look at it for what it is...it's someone's words. If they're not true then it shouldn't matter to her. They're just words. I've worked in the general public for almost 20 years of my life and had several people call me far worse than a gorilla or a ni**er. And yet I can't act irrationally and throat punch every person that calls me a name. Or spits in my face for that matter. It's a matter of being an adult. I get paid much less and have to "bite my tongue" on a daily basis. It's a matter of public decency called professionalism.
Do I agree with what was said to her... No. Do I agree that people should be allowed to say what they want because we have "freedom of speech"... no. But that's reality. And if she's not a big enough person to realize that they are just words and that not all people are friendly then obviously she's got a long road ahead of her.
I was in law enforcement for over 12 years with a spotless record. 8 of those yrs were with a federal agency. In recent there have been several turbulent cases involving officers accused of racism. Some the officer was wrong others the suspect was wrong. That doesn't mean that all police officers are evil or corrupt. It also doesn't mean that all african Americans are gun toting thugs or druggies. Yet because of the actions of a few the vast majority has to suffer the consequences. Racial turbulence is just as much a part of today as it was in the 60s.
My point is that whether the comments directed toward her were related to the film or not is irrelevant. Her comment (though not uncalled for) was ill placed and made it about the film. She stated she didn't care what anyone thought she's a ghostbuster. That makes it about the film. And no matter how bad it pissed her off, she's an upscale actress. She's supposed to be considered a pillar of the community. I.E. a role model. You can't be a role model if you can't even control your emotions. Actors have been the focus of media attacks for years yet you don't see Christian bale, Mel Gibson, or Russell Crowe ranting on their social media sites.
Just be professional and look at it for what it is. Part of the job. If it bothers her that bad....BLOCK THE POST
You forget, this is the entertainment business. Plus everybody is different and some take public opinion too seriously. If you think you're better then her because you have tougher skin, great for you. Other people will tell the truth using colorful metaphors.
Quote from: Wrecktangle on Jan 04, 2016, 08:17:31 PM
I think we have found this years Fantastic 4.
Yea but which one. The one we thought was shit or that one that was absolute shit? :P
The one that was absolute, god-tier shit :laugh:
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/687067946183561216
https://twitter.com/GBNewsdotcom/status/694714621014495233
https://twitter.com/GBNewsdotcom/status/694711124776849409
For the 2016 reboot, however, Ecto-2 is a motorcycle. Click on the photo of the vehicle below for the hi-res version:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Foyster.ignimgs.com%2Fwordpress%2Fstg.ign.com%2F2016%2F02%2FDF-08624.jpg&hash=fb8cc982c28127b77dbf2867be691938886fcba3)
http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/02/11/ghostbusters-first-look-photo-of-the-ecto-2?abthid=56bc94233eb4dd213f00000b
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1s267t9bOA&feature
Quote from: ace3g on Feb 14, 2016, 05:57:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwOr0jXqh1E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1s267t9bOA&feature
Umm...well that was sorta underwhelming and pointless.
The ghosts looks awesome. That all I can take away from this trailer at the moment. Some of the comedy was funny, some flat.
This looks f**king awful. Unfunny jokes, awful CGI and given the whole 'racism in hollywood' thing going we have the black character who might aswell be mowing the lawn saying 'me don't know about science and stuff mister'
Feig is a talentless hack
The ghost designs might be fun. But eh. Hopefully the film has better jokes than these; I doubt they'll make anything remotely as fresh and funny as the original, but that's probably been said already :P
Quote from: DisneyBlu;11941663www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3ugHP-yZXw
It has more dislikes than likes lol! I actually feel sorry for this movie now.
Impressions...
1. Effects actually look
bad! worse than the original films, how is that possible?
2. Looks woefully unfunny.
3. Is this a reboot or sequel?? It hints at being a sequel at the start.
4. Clearly using all the same ideas and beats, almost identically (the head device that was used on Louis Tully, Ecto 1 setup etc...)
5. Overall it looks pretty bad.
Am I the only person who looked the ghosts? They're the best thing in the trailer. They look fun, the CGI isn't ground breaking but good enough.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.collider.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2Fghostbusters-trailer-11.png&hash=e38a2512282bc3a6f82e648b025a3e948f03b922)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.collider.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F03%2Fghostbusters-trailer-image-15.png&hash=28a0b4c510c67b20f32856235aecd52f81bc313b)
Dude they're just CGI transparent people, the 84 movie effects are far superior.
Well the 84 film had great effects in general. I don't think you can criticise this film for the design of the ghosts. They all look like Ghostbusters ghosts. Thats kinda what matters to me. Slimer looks like dog shit though.
I think it looks fun. Some of the jokes aren't working for me, but it seems to be a trailer-editing issue. The actresses look charismatic, the effects look good. Story looks a bit familiar.
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 03, 2016, 04:34:17 PM
Dude they're just CGI transparent people, the 84 movie effects are far superior.
And the designs in the oldies were brilliant. Disappointed to see them try to recreate the library ghost. That thing still freaks me out. So did the electrocuted brothers from GB2.
The delivery is sort of there, but nowhere close to the original film's cast. The script definitely isn't. The game from a few years ago even did the 'characters are possessed' thing better.
I'm actually quite astonished at how obnoxious some of the stereotyping is in execution. Look at Winston. He could have been virtually any ethnicity. We liked him because he was a charismatic blue collar guy who called a spade a spade - none of that had anything to do with the his skin colour. There's a black character in this and she's the exact opposite - a superficial understanding of her ethnicity seems to be informing how she acts and talks, rather than being incidental.
For obvious reasons, a number of female friends of mine on social media were looking forward to this, but even those who've bought into the hype are feeling very WTF about that character's portrayal.
There was something I couldn't quite put my finger on, in regards to the special effects... They feel on a par to what the live-action 'Scooby Doo' films exhibited, because these feel heavily stylised, but then I realised something else about why they felt off.
In the original, Slimer was quite stylised, but that's understandable, because it was providing some spectral comedy relief. The others were different - especially when you look back at the concept art for the various entities. Terror dogs, librarian ghost, the skeletal taxi driver - they all had a certain aesthetic to them and were there to provide a more deliberate horror undertone to the visuals.
Then it clicked... I don't know why, but it seems obvious that the production team aren't going back to those designs for inspiration - they're going back to the 'Real Ghostbusters' cartoon for inspiration!
Seriously. Compare and contrast. The ghost/monster designs we're seeing here fit right in with what we typically saw in the cartoon. It's a very different artistic and design approach. Would be interested in why they went down that route for the creature designs.
Not as terrible as I was expecting but still pretty bad. Will pass on this.
trailers tend to have a trend of ruining comedy scenes but i'm actually looking forward to this. I saw the movie spy recently and that gives me some faith that this will rock.
This trailer (and film) is being destroyed everywhere, literately everyone dislikes it. 48K dislikes for the trailer so far!!
The ghosts look pretty cool, gives me a haunted mansion vibe (NO NOT THE MOVIE). Everything else... I'll pass
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 03, 2016, 10:17:34 PM
This trailer (and film) is being destroyed everywhere, literately everyone dislikes it. 48K dislikes for the trailer so far!!
But how much is that because of the trailer. It's not a great trailer but I think the down votes have alot to do with the female direction. The film is basically become a poster child for feminism and anti-feminism.
And to the guy who says Feig is a hack, that's just stupid.
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Mar 03, 2016, 11:15:35 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 03, 2016, 10:17:34 PM
This trailer (and film) is being destroyed everywhere, literately everyone dislikes it. 48K dislikes for the trailer so far!!
But how much is that because of the trailer. It's not a great trailer but I think the down votes have alot to do with the female direction. The film is basically become a poster child for feminism and anti-feminism.
And to the guy who says Feig is a hack, that's just stupid.
Pretty much what i was thinking.
The effects don't look great by any means and the acting looks stiff and underwhelming, no sense of fun. Too bad. I was really excited about this new cast, but looks like the execution is just not working :(
Oh geez, the trailer was out for only a few hours, and already Tumblr is digging for the Problematic. They've been so excited so geek girls getting their due, and here's a Cadillac driving, street smart, sassy woman of colour. They are guna eat each other alive over this.
Over 82K dislikes for the trailer on You-Tube!
And apparently Sony are deleting negative comments on there bahahahahaha!
According to other comments (hearsay alert!) they also are understaffed, so most negative comments are still up.
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 03, 2016, 10:17:34 PM
This trailer (and film) is being destroyed everywhere, literately everyone dislikes it. 48K dislikes for the trailer so far!!
It does kind of amuse me that the dislikes are overwhelmingly out-doing the likes by a measure of thousands.
Regardless of that, the whole 'feminism' thing is a big red herring. Of course an all-female team could have worked, in the same way as the all-male team did. But it feels like the project is trying to hype in on the fact it has a mostly female cast, instead of just trying to aim for the best possible story/script and letting the genders fall where they may - and that damages the very demographic it's trying to get support from.
I know of one female friend on social media who is
very emotionally invested in this. Like, to the point where any critics are "haters" and that her primary motivation for going out to watch this is apparently because doing so will make the "meninists" angry. As if there are screaming phantom hordes of mysoginists out there who will give a damn
what she spends her money on. it's like her entire reason for wanting it to exist is motivated by
spite, rather than any legitimate desire for the basic concept.
It's very bizarre to see this film get constantly argued over purely down the lines of gender... I, for one, would have loved to see, say, Claudia Black, Tina Fey, Sarah Silverman, Janeane Garofalo and some others, who have a
genuinely good sense of comedy timing, involved in this. I could totally see how an all-female team could have worked every bit as well. It's just that nothing I've seen, so far (except for those 'close ups of equipment' teaser posters) indicates much real production quality or understanding of what made the original work so well.
Yet, any criticism, no matter how constructive in its attempt, is instantly just put down as 'hating', often with some kind of mythical woman-hating agenda (at least, going by what I'm seeing on social media). To that, I can only remind them of the rumours of the Channing Tatum-led spin-off in the works... If the criticism and disappointment truly was driven by sexism, shouldn't those same critics be simultaneously hyped up for that, too?
No... No, they are not. Because nobody wants to see Channing f**king Tatum getting his dude-bro on in a concept which worked
specifically because the formula relied upon slackers who skirt by more because of good luck, cynical bitching and charisma, than acting cute, loudly obnoxious or heroic. Hell, the one time they
try to make a heroic entrance, the film cuts to them getting out of breath by having to climb all those stairs!
There was, of course, the sequel with the statue of liberty... But there are very good reasons why that film was regarded as a failure, guys. Emulate what worked about the original, not what seemed flashy about a failed repeat.
As if to capitalise upon this, the director has apparently now come out and officially stated that the original films no longer exist in this canon. Because erasing the classics worked out so well for '
Terminator Genisys', perhaps? Seems like the strangest creative decision when they actually have original cast members doing individual cameos.
At least that means the game could potentially be seen as the official true third film, if this is now an alternative time-line. The last time almost the entire original cast successfully reprised their characters.
The game was f**king great.
Well according to Andre they are planning lots of GB movies lol!
They have set up an entire studio or whatever (Ghostcorps), just for GB lol!
Best wait and see if this floats first guys, we've heard all this universe building before.
call me old fashion, but i think all of the effects look too...glossy. I agree that they don't really FEEL like ghostbusters ghosts.
Aaaand 100K dislikes for the trailer on You-Tube.
Quote from: Rabbit2100 on Mar 04, 2016, 05:08:28 AM
call me old fashion, but i think all of the effects look too...glossy. I agree that they don't really FEEL like ghostbusters ghosts.
That's my problem with CGI. I like the designs but the obvious CGI is holding it back. The giant circus guy/whatever he was looked cool though.
"30 years ago,
4 scientists saved New York" That's the opening lines to the trailer... How can they get that wrong. Zedmore wasn't a scientist!
Here's a relevant article a friend just wrote shortly before the trailer was released.
http://iamtheonlyphil.wix.com/filmduncefiles#!3-Reasons-an-AllFemale-Ghostbusters-is-Bad-for-Women-in-Hollywood/c218b/56c21b450cf2da78df4dc797 (http://iamtheonlyphil.wix.com/filmduncefiles#!3-Reasons-an-AllFemale-Ghostbusters-is-Bad-for-Women-in-Hollywood/c218b/56c21b450cf2da78df4dc797)
I'm not f**king around here. THAT. WAS. HORRIBLE.
Its a sterile, overly glossy, generic, manufactured, goofy CGI looking mess. It looks like it should have been released back in the late 90's, early 00's.
The original was a gritty, adult aimed, horror comedy that was actually genuinely scary at times. This new thing completely misses the point and is a prime example of a modern day, rebooted cash grab...just like the Robocop remake/reboot was. Its actually pathetic how Hollywood just doesn't ever learn.
The thing that really grates, is the fact that this is the new offering for the Ghostbusters franchise, this is what we are getting after all this time. Had this been an independent movie, a stand alone movie, I'd be like...fine, give it a shot. But this is a reboot of the 1984 all time classic Ghostbusters, one of the greatest movies ever made in its genre and beyond. What we have all seen is just simply not good enough, its actually an insult.
Quote from: frenchfries on Mar 03, 2016, 11:47:12 PM
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Mar 03, 2016, 11:15:35 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 03, 2016, 10:17:34 PM
This trailer (and film) is being destroyed everywhere, literately everyone dislikes it. 48K dislikes for the trailer so far!!
But how much is that because of the trailer. It's not a great trailer but I think the down votes have alot to do with the female direction. The film is basically become a poster child for feminism and anti-feminism.
And to the guy who says Feig is a hack, that's just stupid.
Pretty much what i was thinking.
I'm the guy who said Feig is a hack, he really is. He's trying to be smart by writing female central movies, (which I have no problem with) Look at Bridesmaids, should have been a 'girl power' movie which is a good idea, but all it did was take what Judd Apatow has done and remove the male chromosomes. Gross out humour. As for this, Mcarthey will have at least eight weight jokes, Wieg will be quirky and weird, Chris Hemsworth in a tight vest. This film will be an abortion, they recycled an Exorcist joke!!! Who wrote the script? The f**king Wayans brothers?!!!
Looks like fun. I'll reserve judgement until the film is released.
I wonder if its linked to the first 2? If so why call it Ghostbusters? Not Ghostbusters 3. :-\
It's like if they made a prequel to The Thing and called it The Thing....oh wait.
Quote from: Alien³ on Mar 04, 2016, 10:19:00 AM
Looks like fun. I'll reserve judgement until the film is released.
I wonder if its linked to the first 2? If so why call it Ghostbusters? Not Ghostbusters 3. :-\
It's like if they made a prequel to The Thing and called it The Thing....oh wait.
I have this feeling of insanity when I read "looks like fun". I understand that the effects aren't yet done and there's a lot of clean up to get finished but how the hell did you arrive at "looks like fun"? I was actually holding out hope that they would be able to deliver but that trailer was passionless.
It's appears to be a near literal remake of the original that takes place 30 years after said original. So it's a sequel-remake-rehash-reboot. If such a thing makes any goddamn sense. It is Ghostbusters 3. Wait why does everything smell like copper?
Yeah, if it wasn't for the titles near the start of the trailer, I'd have said it looks like a loose-ish remake. I'm with Alien3 though, trailer looked alright to me, withholding judgement until it's out (unless critical reception is dire I'll probably be seeing it).
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 04, 2016, 05:36:50 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9NdSGka9EM
My favourite comment:
"If they were all men, this would just be an Adam Sandler movie."
So accurate...
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 04, 2016, 11:06:26 AM
but how the hell did you arrive at "looks like fun"?
Just my initial reaction man. Trailers can be deceptive, not all jokes, scenes etc seen in trailers makes it to the final product so it might change. Might.
This is a better trailer.
>random jokes unrelated to anything
>ghosts
>science babble
>naming the technology
>Slimer is present
Looks like Ghostbusters to me.
Quote from: Alien³ on Mar 04, 2016, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 04, 2016, 11:06:26 AM
but how the hell did you arrive at "looks like fun"?
This is a better trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0
The editing differs...but the main reason why it is better: it shows less, it cuts pretty much everything, almost 2 minutes :D
Better, indeed!
Quote from: Alien³ on Mar 04, 2016, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 04, 2016, 11:06:26 AM
but how the hell did you arrive at "looks like fun"?
Just my initial reaction man. Trailers can be deceptive, not all jokes, scenes etc seen in trailers makes it to the final product so it might change. Might.
This is a better trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0
Wow that's the trailer they should have shown...it actually makes me want to see it.
Already Cracked and Buzzfeed are trying to portray the negative reception as 'sexist assholes who don't like female casts'.
Or... or... hear me out... maybe people are mad because someone thought all the reboot needed was a gender swap without an understanding of the humor, or the tone, or anything about Ghostbusters that made it good in the first place. If you really think you can sell a film on the gender of the cast alone, that's textbook pandering.
Quote from: Never say no to Panda! on Mar 04, 2016, 06:09:44 PM
Quote from: Alien³ on Mar 04, 2016, 04:49:37 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 04, 2016, 11:06:26 AM
but how the hell did you arrive at "looks like fun"?
This is a better trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IDXpOX0Cp0
The editing differs...but the main reason why it is better: it shows less, it cuts pretty much everything, almost 2 minutes :D
Yep gotta agree that was a better trailer for those exact reasons. :laugh:
I understand that sometimes a good movie can have a really shitty trailer. The first BvS trailer in my opinion was awful, for example. However this trailer was so not funny and stereotypical as heck.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Mar 04, 2016, 05:22:20 PM
>random jokes unrelated to anything
>ghosts
>science babble
>naming the technology
>Slimer is present
Looks like Ghostbusters to me.
So much wrong with this reply -_-
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 05, 2016, 03:12:01 AM
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Mar 04, 2016, 05:22:20 PM
>random jokes unrelated to anything
>ghosts
>science babble
>naming the technology
>Slimer is present
Looks like Ghostbusters to me.
So much wrong with this reply -_-
He's a troll, he says stuff like this purely for the reaction.
Except I am not a troll and those were my actual thoughts.
I see this as a blatant "reboot" cash-grab masquerading as female empowerment that, because of dilution and mass processing to make comedy of the most inoffensive and politically correct type, and marketing it to the Tumblr demographic, becomes reduced to nothing but derivative, gross-out, schlocky, already-seen-before humor of the lowest common denominator. This is looking not only really derivative and tacky, but hilariously, will probably eventually be called out for being offensive. There are at least four things in the trailer I could call racist or at least stereotypical about the black woman already. Not that I care. I just think that trying to do inoffensive humor isn't possible because you can never win with the demographic to which this is obviously marketed, since they're always just looking for things by which to get offended for other people.
And don't get me wrong, I wouldn't call myself a super fan of the original. It was a good comedy and I leave it at that. And hell, I'm probably the only one I know who thinks Sigourney Weaver and Rick Moranis were the best actors in that movie. But as with The Thing Prequel, there is absolutely no reason to remake or reboot the franchise. This is just what happens when you try to make humor of the least offensive, most mass-market type: utter garbage.
It's funny but at least the black character got some lines of dialog in the trailer. Hell Ernie Hudson wasn't even credited in the first trailer even though he was in it and wearing the GB uniform.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 05, 2016, 11:21:07 PM
It's funny but at least the black character got some lines of dialog in the trailer. Hell Ernie Hudson wasn't even credited in the first trailer even though he was in it and wearing the GB uniform.
See? We beat racism!
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcrUdEvWEAA4udG.jpg)
oh, ho ho ho, now that's just mean; but it's not wrong.
I liked Robocop as movie. It was competent. If it wasn't a remake of a vastly superior and iconic film, it probably would have got decent reception.
Well three of those movies were awesome, never saw Minority Report though.
Quote from: Sabby on Mar 06, 2016, 01:59:08 AM
I liked Robocop as movie. It was competent. If it wasn't a remake of a vastly superior and iconic film, it probably would have got decent reception.
Maybe. For me it was straight to DVD material.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Mar 06, 2016, 02:27:25 AM
Well three of those movies were awesome, never saw Minority Report though.
Awesome is way too strong of a word... especially since Minority Report is that best on that list.
I'm not really looking forward to the movie, wasn't even much of a ghostbuster fan. Only recently while watching some shitty youtube channel did I realize ghostbusters is an awesome movie. Then there was the moaning over the female cast, to which I figured give them a chance, then this trailer came out... and you know what. It's terrible. Everyone is trying to lie to themselves in the hopes that the next one is better and I really hope it is. Cause they're isn't all that many movies that I want to see this year. Get your shit together ghostbusters.
Even the ladies don't like it from what I'm seeing on Facebook. Many complaints about the racial stereotyping of Leslie Jones character. I actually find this extremely amusing and puzzling, not because I'm being deliberately evil, but because this is a Paul Feig movie, a pro-feminist and supposed mighty progressive, yet he has simply thrown out a very dated, backwards, stereotypically cliched character, most odd.
I'd say: Whatever. It's a f**king movie. Entertainment, you know.
Quote from: Magegg on Mar 06, 2016, 05:02:03 AM
I'd say: Whatever. It's a f**king movie. Entertainment, you know.
It's not a movie, it's social engineering. Boys are just empty minds on top of insecure muscle. They soak up whatever is portrayed to them in media and then go on to force their understanding of it onto the next generation. The only way to fix society is to replace the black Ghostbuster with a Demisexual, Imnigender, Transchild, Incubus/Cloudkin woman of colour and her Headmates.
Take that Bill Murray, ya Cis.
lol It's funny when fans can do better things than the "professionals"
Quote from: Gilfryd on Mar 06, 2016, 12:08:51 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcrUdEvWEAA4udG.jpg)
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Mar 06, 2016, 02:27:25 AM
Well three of those movies were awesome, never saw Minority Report though.
Minority Report?
I think he means Total Recall.
Oh shit that's right, ha, I thought it was minority report too.
Wow, this movie does look awful, judging by the trailer at least. I only watched because there seems to be a bit of hoo-hah going on about it, but I can definitely say it was the most painful trailer I've ever seen.
Quote from: PsyKore on Mar 07, 2016, 11:40:36 AM
Wow, this movie does look awful, judging by the trailer at least. I only watched because there seems to be a bit of hoo-hah going on about it, but I can definitely say it was the most painful trailer I've ever seen.
you must not watch a lot of trailers.
in related news...
'Ghostbusters' Animated Movie Snares 'Clash of Clans' Commercial Director (Exclusive) (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ghostbusters-animated-movie-snares-clash-862537)
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Mar 09, 2016, 03:41:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egs6RfGenvg
in related news...
'Ghostbusters' Animated Movie Snares 'Clash of Clans' Commercial Director (Exclusive) (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ghostbusters-animated-movie-snares-clash-862537)
So they do in fact hire Hemsworth simply because he's hunky, ooOOoo so sexist! reverse sexism! And there's sexist jokes about women too! confused Feig.
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Mar 09, 2016, 03:41:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egs6RfGenvg
in related news...
'Ghostbusters' Animated Movie Snares 'Clash of Clans' Commercial Director (Exclusive) (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ghostbusters-animated-movie-snares-clash-862537)
Wow sony banned Americans from watching that. :P
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 09, 2016, 05:01:36 PM
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Mar 09, 2016, 03:41:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egs6RfGenvg
in related news...
'Ghostbusters' Animated Movie Snares 'Clash of Clans' Commercial Director (Exclusive) (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ghostbusters-animated-movie-snares-clash-862537)
So they do in fact hire Hemsworth simply because he's hunky, ooOOoo so sexist! reverse sexism! And there's sexist jokes about women too! confused Feig.
Holy shit the ghostbusters world has come full circle, hasn't it. Even the male character is stereotyped. Also the "if it's because I'm black or because I'm a women... the other girl is fat so it is most definitely not because you are a women... it's because you are black. I mean holy shit it can't be more obvious the message being sent there. Honest question. Did they do that for the international trailer because non-us people think New York City folk are heavily racist to black people?
That joke was funny in the "hey, that ain't right" sort of way.
Da Fuk r tey tinkin?
Considering this film has been directed by a self proclaimed feminist and progressive, it's pretty backwards looking frankly.
Nailed it.
Quote from: frenchfries on Mar 07, 2016, 11:22:36 PM
Quote from: PsyKore on Mar 07, 2016, 11:40:36 AM
Wow, this movie does look awful, judging by the trailer at least. I only watched because there seems to be a bit of hoo-hah going on about it, but I can definitely say it was the most painful trailer I've ever seen.
you must not watch a lot of trailers.
Ok cool.
This movie needs to be STRAIGHT TO VHS :D
f**k this new ghosbusters lol
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on Mar 09, 2016, 03:41:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Egs6RfGenvg
in related news...
'Ghostbusters' Animated Movie Snares 'Clash of Clans' Commercial Director (Exclusive) (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ghostbusters-animated-movie-snares-clash-862537)
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 13, 2016, 06:28:18 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQIuTGfPHvA
Hate the way that's edited; it's like it has to have jump cuts and random segues for the ADHD kids. It's also pretty brazen for her to tell people to not see the movie based on the trailer alone, if only to send a message to Hollywood to not remake a particular movie she likes. I find that really scummy and selfish.
Wow finally someone came right out and said it, the trailer stinks.
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 10, 2016, 02:22:02 AM
Considering this film has been directed by a self proclaimed feminist and progressive, it's pretty backwards looking frankly.
Nailed it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfqeElZ4EU4
Sexism is the reason for negativity? Nope. It's a reboot of a beloved 80's classic movie franchise. Also the trailer is shit.
Quote from: Bjørn Half-hand on Mar 13, 2016, 07:09:31 PM
Quote from: Hubbs on Mar 10, 2016, 02:22:02 AM
Considering this film has been directed by a self proclaimed feminist and progressive, it's pretty backwards looking frankly.
Nailed it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfqeElZ4EU4
Sexism is the reason for negativity? Nope. It's a reboot of a beloved 80's classic movie franchise. Also the trailer is shit.
But...but...sexism! its trendy mkay.
Someone over on Reddit apparently posted the entire synopsis. Was allegedly before the recent international advert hit and they referenced the dragon which was in that.
If true, it's awful.
What role does the dragon play?
Spoiler
Oh man Venkman commits suicide in that rumor synopsis.
There's no way that can be real. A movie can't be that bad.
Spoiler
Doesn't commit suicide. The dragon thing shoves him from a great height and he dies.
It reminded me that Feig's initial - and terrible - pitch was a part of the leaked Sony E-mails and I recall a lot of people hoping they had the common sense to change that story idea.
If this new leak is to be believed, seems it's
mostly intact.
It also reminded me of how the E-mails revealed they would pursue legal action if Murray refused a cameo. Gawd... Sony management are petty.
If anybody wants to read, go to here (but be warned that if it's true, it reveals the
entire story): https://www.reddit.com/r/ghostbusters/comments/493zai/ive_seen_an_early_version_of_the_new_ghostbusters/
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Mar 14, 2016, 06:17:12 PM
Spoiler
Doesn't commit suicide. The dragon thing shoves him from a great height and he dies.
It reminded me that Feig's initial - and terrible - pitch was a part of the leaked Sony E-mails and I recall a lot of people hoping they had the common sense to change that story idea.
If this new leak is to be believed, seems it's mostly intact.
It also reminded me of how the E-mails revealed they would pursue legal action if Murray refused a cameo. Gawd... Sony management are petty.
If anybody wants to read, go to here (but be warned that if it's true, it reveals the entire story): https://www.reddit.com/r/ghostbusters/comments/493zai/ive_seen_an_early_version_of_the_new_ghostbusters/
If that is true then this movie really is dog shit.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Mar 14, 2016, 06:17:12 PM
Spoiler
Doesn't commit suicide. The dragon thing shoves him from a great height and he dies.
And it's OOC Murray, not Venkman.
Still a little shit.
This looks terrible, don't care who the leads are. Just terrrible...
They should have left GB alone no matter who tried to make it or star in it, can't just let anything be anymore.
Located those leaked E-mails!
Feig's original (and worrying) pitch:
https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/64921
That very ambiguous first teaser footage should have been a red flag, because it showed the soldiers.
Threats to sue the original cast if they don't do cameos:
https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/104704
Murray, specifically. But it wouldn't surprise me if they did likewise for the rest.
Quote from: Omegamorph on Mar 14, 2016, 08:49:37 PM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Mar 14, 2016, 06:17:12 PM
Spoiler
Doesn't commit suicide. The dragon thing shoves him from a great height and he dies.
And it's OOC Murray, not Venkman.
Still a little shit.
Spoiler
I thought he jumped out the window when the dragon showed up... wait being shoved out isn't any better.
Also it is Venkman right? All the characters have the same names right? They just never were GB's in the GB3 timeline.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Mar 14, 2016, 09:36:27 PM
Located those leaked E-mails!
Feig's original (and worrying) pitch:
https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/64921
That very ambiguous first teaser footage should have been a red flag, because it showed the soldiers.
Wow. Thank god this wasn't a FOX movie, otherwise after reading that I'm pretty sure they'd be xeno-ghosts in this.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 14, 2016, 10:05:40 PM
Spoiler
I thought he jumped out the window when the dragon showed up... wait being shoved out isn't any better.
Not according to the leaked stuff on Reddit Xenomorphine posted.
While the leaks aren't 100% confirmed, please remember to put discussion of those details in spoiler tags (the nuclear radiation sign will auto-add that), just in case they prove to be legitimate. :)
And, from what I'm aware, all the cameos are meant to be completely different characters. This is a remake set in an alternative history.
Essentially, the official computer game really has turned out to be the 'true' third film.
Oh, lol gotcha. I was reading a 3rd person synopsis.
This stinks.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 29, 2016, 11:16:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Is that real? why are they at a rock concern?
'Cause there's ghosts to be a-busting! They don't pick where the ghosts appear.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Mar 30, 2016, 03:46:36 PM
'Cause there's ghosts to be a-busting! They don't pick where the ghosts appear.
Meh, I guess, could it be like that scene in TMNT 2 with Vanilla Ice?
Aint gonna watch ghostbusters,its gonna be shit trust me reboots never work(apart from dark night)
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 29, 2016, 11:16:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Oh god I'm so sorry guys but I can't help but look at that and think they're grabbing their gigantic protopack cocks jizzing ectoplasma everywhere. The angle of that shot is wrong but it has to be intentional.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 30, 2016, 11:28:24 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 29, 2016, 11:16:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Oh god I'm so sorry guys but I can't help but look at that and think they're grabbing their gigantic protopack cocks jizzing ectoplasma everywhere. The angle of that shot is wrong but it has to be intentional.
WTF I WAS NOT THINKING OF THAT BUT NOW OF YOU SAYING THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Mar 30, 2016, 11:32:48 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 30, 2016, 11:28:24 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 29, 2016, 11:16:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Oh god I'm so sorry guys but I can't help but look at that and think they're grabbing their gigantic protopack cocks jizzing ectoplasma everywhere. The angle of that shot is wrong but it has to be intentional.
WTF I WAS NOT THINKING OF THAT BUT NOW OF YOU SAYING THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I couldn't help it because all of the actors look as if they're trying their hardest not to laugh.
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Mar 30, 2016, 11:32:48 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 30, 2016, 11:28:24 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 29, 2016, 11:16:04 PM
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYSx9O1O.jpg&hash=ae0c0f7dac592d84c29d90ef6aea6ee2a10e9702)
Oh god I'm so sorry guys but I can't help but look at that and think they're grabbing their gigantic protopack cocks jizzing ectoplasma everywhere. The angle of that shot is wrong but it has to be intentional.
WTF I WAS NOT THINKING OF THAT BUT NOW OF YOU SAYING THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's because Ghostbusters, like many other properties, is nothing but a thinly disguised machista fantasy.
Those damn firefighters, most sexist profession ever.
Are you trying to say that we, as men, want to be dominated by women with giant hoses?
No.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Mar 31, 2016, 07:38:31 AM
Are you trying to say that we, as men, want to be dominated by women with giant hoses?
Yes! ;D
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Mar 30, 2016, 08:38:12 PM
Aint gonna watch ghostbusters,its gonna be shit trust me reboots never work(apart from dark night)
Karate Kid reboot was better than the original. Fight me internet.
Quote from: Sabby on Mar 31, 2016, 02:53:39 PM
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Mar 30, 2016, 08:38:12 PM
Aint gonna watch ghostbusters,its gonna be shit trust me reboots never work(apart from dark night)
Karate Kid reboot was better than the original. Fight me internet.
I must admit, it got a lot of hate and I thought it was going to suck going in but it wasn't that bad. It's premise was an exact remake but it was fun. None the less, for me, nothing will beat the original.
I gave the new Karate Kid movie a chance, but when he pulls off that back flip triple axle kick at the end...at what point during the movie did Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) ever teach him and/or do that kick himself.
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 31, 2016, 10:13:46 PM
I gave the new Karate Kid movie a chance, but when he pulls off that back flip triple axle kick at the end...at what point during the movie did Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) ever teach him and/or do that kick himself.
Wasn't he practicing something similar while hanging cloths? I only ever watched the movie once but I think it was one of those moves that he learned little by little and then pieced it altogether. I took it as a "gotta think on your feet" deal. The again that's 2010 film making for yea.
This thread should be renamed R.I.P. Ghostbusters.
Quote from: genocyber on Apr 01, 2016, 06:04:23 AM
This thread should be renamed R.I.P. Ghostbusters.
HI-FIVE :o
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Apr 01, 2016, 09:16:34 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Apr 01, 2016, 06:04:23 AM
This thread should be renamed R.I.P. Ghostbusters.
HI-FIVE :o
DOWN-LOW
That's too high; actually you've got to be f**king high to even contemplate seeing this. Plus Movie tickets aren't cheap, it's like just throwing away a sizable joint. It's so bad it's a double negative.
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 31, 2016, 10:13:46 PM
I gave the new Karate Kid movie a chance, but when he pulls off that back flip triple axle kick at the end...at what point during the movie did Mr. Han (Jackie Chan) ever teach him and/or do that kick himself.
That's too silly, but pulling a Crane Kick out of his ass at the last second as an 'unblockable move' is somehow better? Overall, the remake was just more consistent in it's tone, and did the iconic scenes much better.
This movie is not funny.
Have to admit, the coffee bit made me chuckle. It's the pretty, dumb blonde woman role reversed. It's lazy writing
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiDGxy1UkAAWUtE.jpg:large)
They should have just let it be. It's the sequel no one needed.
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on May 10, 2016, 12:14:04 AM
They should have just let it be. It's the sequel no one needed.
... which makes it the one that we deserve? :o
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on May 10, 2016, 12:14:04 AM
They should have just let it be. It's the sequel no one needed.
Im praying that everyone boycotts the cinema then maybe hollywood will rethink the strategy(If they get money they will carry on remaking great franchises)
I don't even see the problem with remaking it. The idea isn't inherently flawed. You can retell it in some interesting ways, update it for current times. Imagine if the Ghostbusters got their rise from social media. That's an interesting angle.
In my opinion, a remake only has one excuse for being shot for shot, and that's because the original was technically inept by todays standards. Ghostbusters wasn't. Just replacing all the dicks with c**ts isn't a spin.
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/ghostbusters/38949/ghostbusters-melissa-mccarthy-on-the-confusing-trailer
New title apparently.
Better than the first trailer, but it still looks weak
Doesn't change my mind at all. All jokes fall flat. Definitely not interested, looks like kiddy stuff. Let kids enjoy it, but I'm definitely not going to see it.
Quote from: Novak 1334 on May 18, 2016, 03:06:30 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tktnpEiEoiI
Better than the first trailer, but it still looks weak
Still looks terrible, Slimer looks awful and the humour is weak as hell.
'We don't want mass hysteria', oh I see what you did there, lame.
If this had nothing to do with the iconic franchise then I'd say it looks like dumb fun, but the fact
this is the next Ghostbusters movie is depressing.
It' beat for beat a rehash of the first movie. The jokes aren't landing at all. A race joke and a selfie joke, that was supposed to be the 'funny' moments in the trailer. I've watched it eight times now, and every time I watch it, it looks worse
It's supposed to be the concept adapted for a new audience (tweens, I guess). We're simply not the target audience.
The original GB duology was an organic product and a lightning in a bottle. I don't think it would be a good idea to try to re-create the thing for all of us that enjoyed the movie during our youth.
But it's not a bad idea to try to "repackage it" as a spin-off-y thing. As long as manchilds can mature and let that "THEY'RE RAEPING MY CHILDHOOD!" "ALL PRODUCTS SHOULD BE AIMED AT MEEEE!!" thing go, that's the decision of the company. Let's see if its new product can catch the audience they expect.
Quote from: Magegg on May 18, 2016, 04:27:43 PM
It's supposed to be the concept adapted for a new audience (tweens, I guess). We're simply not the target audience.
The original GB duology was an organic product and a lightning in a bottle. I don't think it would be a good idea to try to re-create the thing for all of us that enjoyed the movie during our youth.
But it's not a bad idea to try to "repackage it" as a spin-off-y thing. As long as manchilds can mature and let that "THEY'RE RAEPING MY CHILDHOOD!" "ALL PRODUCTS SHOULD BE AIMED AT MEEEE!!" thing go, that's the decision of the company. Let's see if its new product can catch the audience they expect.
So completely alienate the audience of the original. And they wonder why so much hate has been levelled at this movie. And it isn't a spin off, it's a remake
Quote from: Magegg on May 18, 2016, 04:27:43 PM
It's supposed to be the concept adapted for a new audience (tweens, I guess). We're simply not the target audience.
I was about to concede that but for one huge issue, the jokes are geared at older folks. You gonna need a bigger boat? The race jokes? That's not all that big a deal with kids and tweens. This movie is coming off more as a middle age chick flick.
You know, I don't think they even know who their audience is.
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 18, 2016, 11:49:56 PM
Quote from: Magegg on May 18, 2016, 04:27:43 PM
It's supposed to be the concept adapted for a new audience (tweens, I guess). We're simply not the target audience.
I was about to concede that but for one huge issue, the jokes are geared at older folks. You gonna need a bigger boat? The race jokes? That's not all that big a deal with kids and tweens. This movie is coming off more as a middle age chick flick.
You know, I don't think they even know who their audience is.
They do. Anita Sarkeesian
They've targeted the movie at the younger modern generation obviously. Unfortunately the younger modern generation wouldn't know a good movie if it painted itself pink and Morris danced around in front of them, slapping them repeatedly across the face wearing nothing but a latex gimp mask.
I actually like the ghosts, the rest of it doesn't do anything for me. Not as a Ghostbuster film anyway.
The effects looked great in IMAX 3D... didn't help anything else.
Quote from: Hubbs on May 19, 2016, 03:32:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz8X2A7wHyQ
That's just embarrassing. These Internet "critics" are pathetic. They have no credibility, especially the ones who think they actually have.
James Rolfe is a well respected YouTube critic. He made his point fairly and respectfully. How is that pathetic?
People attacking a guy who simply has no interest to see a remake of a movie he liked (shocking, I know!) need to f**k right off. It's worse than children.
YouTube critic. You answered it yourself. Click baiters, that's all they pretty much are. This video is completely pointless, using a bandwagon to further his channel. I don't blame him, it works, but doesn't command respect when it comes to his actual reviews. I've agreed with some of his reviews but that doesn't matter when he puts out bollocks like this.
So if your popular then having an opinion means your being a shill? Get out of here.
First off, all critics are opinion based rhetoric. They give their opinion whether you want them to or not; but it is up to you read it and give a f**k or not.
The Nerd is right though. Why bother giving your money to something that you think you'll hate. There was one mistake that James made though, it's ok to called this movie Ghostbuster; because the original will now simply be called The Real Ghostbusters.
What is this, 2005? I didn't think this aversion to online critics was still around. Hell, I'd trust a Youtube critics analysis before a 'real' critic any day. At least they're independent, so even if you disagree with them, you know that review wasn't bought. Or are we still working under that dad logic that the if it happens on the internet it's not real?
He's absolutely right, people never learn with movies, they complain about bad films but continue to pay to go see them. Never ending vicious circle, just stop going!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnLzz_hxzxo
I don't think a cycle like that is enough though. Movies can bomb because of one bad opening. There's no way in hell a terrible reboot can make bank based on just the people who are curious to see how bad it is. Those guys show up once early and then contribute to the mass of negative reception which would kill the movie after opening. But that's only true if the general movie goer wasn't interested in seeing it.
I'm sure the morbidly curious don't help, but I think the movies failure or success doesn't ride too strongly on them.
This is a good video explaining how the movie came to be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFCxUpGzbc4(TLDR; some entitled SJW took the brand and hired her gay best friend to make a movie for her crowd)
Quote from: Hubbs on May 20, 2016, 02:27:30 AM
He's absolutely right, people never learn with movies, they complain about bad films but continue to pay to go see them. Never ending vicious circle, just stop going!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnLzz_hxzxo
Well, different crowds do contribute to the overall result.
I have only seen the first and last Transformers on theaters and they still make billions, like he said.
Apparently there are enough people that like those messes.
Quote from: genocyber on May 20, 2016, 04:07:22 AM
This is a good video explaining how the movie came to be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFCxUpGzbc4
(TLDR; some entitled SJW took the brand and hired her gay best friend to make a movie for her crowd)
Yep, sounds about right. They did it with the skeptic movie, they did it with Occupy Wallstreet, they did it with Gamergate, Black Lives Matter, Universities... They just scumbag their way into something, take it over, and then eat it from the inside. All things considered, a film franchise is fairly low on the list of casualties.
Oh well, sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say. There has to be some kind of threshold where they become too exposed to the public.
Marshmallow Man looks more real
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Stay-puft-marshmallow-man.jpg)
I know the problem with this movie; they've replaced comedy with stupid idiocentric idioms.
Marshmellow Man looks like such shit here. It looks like he's from a Sega Saturn cutscene.
Maybe I'm just an oddity, but I'm not seeing the problem with the effects. CGI rarely looks as convincing as practical, but these don't look terrible. I guess you could argue they're overdesigned. Marshmellow Mans leg looked weighty and moved right, but maybe way too much detail? You could definitely say that for Slimer.
It looks like a tv movie designed by Nickolodian for halloween. Remember Haunted Mansion with Eddy Murphy?
Quote from: genocyber on May 21, 2016, 04:57:05 AM
It looks like a tv movie designed by Nickolodian for halloween. Remember Haunted Mansion with Eddy Murphy?
I can't see them as comparable.
Quote from: Crazy Shrimp on May 21, 2016, 03:32:56 AM
Marshmallow Man looks more real
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d8/Stay-puft-marshmallow-man.jpg
Yes!
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 05:05:24 AM
Quote from: genocyber on May 21, 2016, 04:57:05 AM
It looks like a tv movie designed by Nickolodian for halloween. Remember Haunted Mansion with Eddy Murphy?
I can see them as comparable.
Yea comparable but the effects aren't bad, least of all they're probably unfinished in the trailers. However they choose to go from the "happy go-lucky killing machine" ghost to the "oh yea that is obviously the thing that will kill us all" ghost. Fiege is totally missing the point. I'm starting to believe he is a shitty director.
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 21, 2016, 06:23:06 AM
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 05:05:24 AM
Quote from: genocyber on May 21, 2016, 04:57:05 AM
It looks like a tv movie designed by Nickolodian for halloween. Remember Haunted Mansion with Eddy Murphy?
I can see them as comparable.
Yea comparable but the effects aren't bad, least of all they're probably unfinished in the trailers. However they choose to go from the "happy go-lucky killing machine" ghost to the "oh yea that is obviously the thing that will kill us all" ghost. Fiege is totally missing the point. I'm starting to believe he is a shitty director.
Just as I edited to say CAN'T. Typo.
Well the obvious brightly colored green slime is a very nickolodian trope, with the neon brightly colored blue ghosts being very much like Haunted Mansion.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.kinja-img.com%2Fgawker-media%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Fs--goltAObM--%2Fc_scale%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_80%2Cw_800%2Fmefiytn23mzqoqdfok2l.png&hash=f819ab23b8a5fa7c95eec398613164d150e0b49c)
(https://magicalmoviereviews.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/hm3.jpg)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sbs.com.au%2Fmovies%2Fsites%2Fsbs.com.au.film%2Ffiles%2Fstyles%2Fbody_image%2Fpublic%2Fslime.jpg%3Fitok%3DZKKAX6Pn%26amp%3Bmtime%3D1457046655&hash=9b1d908dc3da87baaf756b127d79cd357fc18868)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette1.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fnickelodeon%2Fimages%2F0%2F0c%2FScreen_shot_2012-09-30_at_2.59.18_PM.png%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20120930191055&hash=e24f23084ae1324a93ae187353c3ade5e21ced21)
We're not talking about themes, we're talking about CGI quality, and it seems every time a CG heavy film comes out, everyone takes the bullet train to Hyperbole Town and compares it to 64 bit graphics. Or earlier. It's stupid.
I'm not saying the CGI in Ghostbusters 3 looks superb, but Sega Saturn? Really? Come on guys, you don't need to go to these ridiculous lengths to shit on something that is already so shittable.
What I saw in the IMAX trailer looked great... however damn, it does look Nickelodeon.
I made the 'Haunted Mansion' comparison back when the first advert hit. I continue to think, however, that it's a result of not going back to the original film's concept art, but the art department being told to go back to 'The Real Ghostbusters' cartoon for visual inspiration. What we see, so far, fits right in with that cartoon's style of ghosts.
Unfortunately, this new trailer actually proves this is going to be awful... Why? Because it shows Hemsworth's character getting abducted just like that leaked Reddit story reveal claimed he would. That, the way he turns in villain-style to the camera and confirmation of the Reddit leaker's reveal about the 'emblem ghost' effectively replacing Stay Puft, seem to increasingly point to that alarming Reddit leak as being genuine.
We already knew Feig's story pitch from the leaked Sony e-mails (complete with a cringe-worthy musical number) and it was horrifically bad. The Reddit leaker said very little has changed, aside from taking away the 'alien ghosts' idea (potentially an interesting concept, but he literally pitched it as nothing but a gimmick, instead of a plot-point to build off of).
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 21, 2016, 12:58:10 PM
What I saw in the IMAX trailer looked great... however damn, it does look Nickelodeon.
I guess a Ghostbusters/Scooby Doo crossover movie will be next.
You know what would have made for an interesting, up right awesome movie. If it was set in the future, where all the real ghostbusters were dead and have them all become ghosts. Where they realize that they never once asked a ghost to leave before shooting them with hot plasma and that they were the real bad guys the whole time. Then we could bring in the female ghostbusters to murder them in cold ectoplasma. Yea really turn the story up side it's head. The city would then demand the release of the ghostbusters and pass amendments to the law that makes being a ghost legal. That ghosts are still people and deserve to use whatever restroom they see fit.
Take that you f'n feminist. :-X
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 21, 2016, 09:53:21 PM
You know what would have made for an interesting, up right awesome movie. If it was set in the future, where all the real ghostbusters were dead and have them all become ghosts. Where they realize that they never once asked a ghost to leave before shooting them with hot plasma and that they were the real bad guys the whole time. Then we could bring in the female ghostbusters to murder them in cold ectoplasma. Yea really turn the story up side it's head. The city would then demand the release of the ghostbusters and pass amendments to the law that makes being a ghost legal. That ghosts are still people and deserve to use whatever restroom they see fit.
Take that you f'n feminist. :-X
...that actually sounds like a pretty sound idea for a Ghostbusters sequel
I think the best course of action would be to make a new Ghostbusters cartoon series, and mix it with the style of Real Ghostbusters humor and the darkness of Extreme Ghostbusters. Get Disney to produce it.
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 04:53:53 AM
Maybe I'm just an oddity, but I'm not seeing the problem with the effects. CGI rarely looks as convincing as practical, but these don't look terrible. I guess you could argue they're overdesigned. Marshmellow Mans leg looked weighty and moved right, but maybe way too much detail? You could definitely say that for Slimer.
It's not the Marshmallow Man, it's
the ghost from the Ghostbusters
logo.
Quote from: g2vd on May 22, 2016, 12:16:25 AM
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 04:53:53 AM
Maybe I'm just an oddity, but I'm not seeing the problem with the effects. CGI rarely looks as convincing as practical, but these don't look terrible. I guess you could argue they're overdesigned. Marshmellow Mans leg looked weighty and moved right, but maybe way too much detail? You could definitely say that for Slimer.
It's not the Marshmallow Man, it's the ghost from the Ghostbusters logo.
I heard as much yeah. Ya know... that also could work, in the right hands. I imagine copyright issues kept them from using the Stay Puft brand, or maybe they're just so desperate to show they aren't just hijacking a franchise they have no love for. Look guys! It's... Ghost... man, G-ghostboy, the guy, you know, the one we all know and love, here he is, oh boy, what a franchise, huh?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3HEg98daikI tell you guys, every now and then I love a good shit rant. :laugh:
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 22, 2016, 02:42:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3HEg98daik
I tell you guys, every now and done I love a good shit rant. :laugh:
I liked the trailers for this movie,
i even laughed hard at the black womans jokes.
And ive seen the first Ghostbuster movies a thousand times.
I would probably gonna see this one and i probably gonna enjoy it.
Alpha is ranting like the rest because his Youtube buddies Mike Matei and James Rolfe also hate on this movie,
but i dont see it i dont see the hate.
Ive seen the last Star Trek trailer and it sucks so much ass, same as X-men trailer and the Turtles finally look what it should look the first time, im not for the all female cast, but the hate is totally bullshit.
And f**k Alpha Omega Sin and his pussy rant he is just another sheep in the herd.
I am sorry to say, this movie looks like a souless remake that does nothing for the brand or the story.
I just don't wanna see this movie anymore. The trailers sell a product that doesn't seem to be worth the investment.
Quote from: Infected on May 22, 2016, 12:42:58 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 22, 2016, 02:42:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3HEg98daik
I tell you guys, every now and done I love a good shit rant. :laugh:
I liked the trailers for this movie,
i even laughed hard at the black womans jokes.
And ive seen the first Ghostbuster movies a thousand times.
I would probably gonna see this one and i probably gonna enjoy it.
Alpha is ranting like the rest because his Youtube buddies Mike Matei and James Rolfe also hate on this movie,
but i dont see it i dont see the hate.
Ive seen the last Star Trek trailer and it sucks so much ass, same as X-men trailer and the Turtles finally look what it should look the first time, im not for the all female cast, but the hate is totally bullshit.
And f**k Alpha Omega Sin and his pussy rant he is just another sheep in the herd.
If you like it, go see it. So far for me, I'm not impressed, and I get his rant because I'm tired of hearing the same 'It's misogyny' to not like this movie. I've got no problems with female leads. What I have got a problem with is why they have female leads. To push an agenda, simple as, which I could even look over if what they produced actually looked good. But it doesn't.
Jokes fall flat, it's ripping scenes from the first movie. Race joke, gender joke, selfie joke. I'm saying it again, Paul Feig in a wet blanket, hack.
Alphaomegasin is one of the most hideous and stupid manchilds I've seen in YT, I asked him a quesion once in one of his "rants" and two comments after that he was already telling me that he was going to f**k my mom and things like that.
I feel pity for people who think he's smart or anything.
Quote from: Novak 1334 on May 22, 2016, 10:08:27 PM
Quote from: Infected on May 22, 2016, 12:42:58 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 22, 2016, 02:42:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3HEg98daik
I tell you guys, every now and done I love a good shit rant. :laugh:
I liked the trailers for this movie,
i even laughed hard at the black womans jokes.
And ive seen the first Ghostbuster movies a thousand times.
I would probably gonna see this one and i probably gonna enjoy it.
Alpha is ranting like the rest because his Youtube buddies Mike Matei and James Rolfe also hate on this movie,
but i dont see it i dont see the hate.
Ive seen the last Star Trek trailer and it sucks so much ass, same as X-men trailer and the Turtles finally look what it should look the first time, im not for the all female cast, but the hate is totally bullshit.
And f**k Alpha Omega Sin and his pussy rant he is just another sheep in the herd.
If you like it, go see it. So far for me, I'm not impressed, and I get his rant because I'm tired of hearing the same 'It's misogyny' to not like this movie. I've got no problems with female leads. What I have got a problem with is why they have female leads. To push an agenda, simple as, which I could even look over if what they produced actually looked good. But it doesn't.
Jokes fall flat, it's ripping scenes from the first movie. Race joke, gender joke, selfie joke. I'm saying it again, Paul Feig in a wet blanket, hack.
It could be worse, they could have had Queen Latifa in it.
But the all female cast was a surprise to me also and seeing the trailer some of them shouldnt be in it,
i say they should have put Shia La Beaouff in it with the black woman and Chris Hemsworth, Jack Nicholson, the Rock,
Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughn, Laurence Fishburn, Bill Murray and f**k it
Quote from: Infected on May 22, 2016, 12:42:58 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 22, 2016, 02:42:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3HEg98daik
I tell you guys, every now and done I love a good shit rant. :laugh:
I liked the trailers for this movie,
i even laughed hard at the black womans jokes.
And ive seen the first Ghostbuster movies a thousand times.
I would probably gonna see this one and i probably gonna enjoy it.
Alpha is ranting like the rest because his Youtube buddies Mike Matei and James Rolfe also hate on this movie,
but i dont see it i dont see the hate.
Ive seen the last Star Trek trailer and it sucks so much ass, same as X-men trailer and the Turtles finally look what it should look the first time, im not for the all female cast, but the hate is totally bullshit.
And f**k Alpha Omega Sin and his pussy rant he is just another sheep in the herd.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzNE64EPgVY
Good god I have no idea who alphaomegasin is but he surely touched a nerve somehow. It was the guy in that shit rant video I posted, right? Yea I ran into that video after somebody posted some fine late 80's German Rock-pop-grunge-thing. I don't even know how I ended up there.
:laugh:
Quote from: Sabby on May 22, 2016, 01:47:31 AM
Quote from: g2vd on May 22, 2016, 12:16:25 AM
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 04:53:53 AM
Maybe I'm just an oddity, but I'm not seeing the problem with the effects. CGI rarely looks as convincing as practical, but these don't look terrible. I guess you could argue they're overdesigned. Marshmellow Mans leg looked weighty and moved right, but maybe way too much detail? You could definitely say that for Slimer.
It's not the Marshmallow Man, it's the ghost from the Ghostbusters logo.
I heard as much yeah. Ya know... that also could work, in the right hands. I imagine copyright issues kept them from using the Stay Puft brand, or maybe they're just so desperate to show they aren't just hijacking a franchise they have no love for. Look guys! It's... Ghost... man, G-ghostboy, the guy, you know, the one we all know and love, here he is, oh boy, what a franchise, huh?
It's pretty much exactly what one would imagine..it's the logo with teeth. spoiler just incase someone doesn't want to be spoiled I guess.
Spoiler
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiypZ_qVAAA-v8P.jpg)
Quote from: g2vd on May 23, 2016, 10:47:49 AM
Quote from: Sabby on May 22, 2016, 01:47:31 AM
Quote from: g2vd on May 22, 2016, 12:16:25 AM
Quote from: Sabby on May 21, 2016, 04:53:53 AM
Maybe I'm just an oddity, but I'm not seeing the problem with the effects. CGI rarely looks as convincing as practical, but these don't look terrible. I guess you could argue they're overdesigned. Marshmellow Mans leg looked weighty and moved right, but maybe way too much detail? You could definitely say that for Slimer.
It's not the Marshmallow Man, it's the ghost from the Ghostbusters logo.
I heard as much yeah. Ya know... that also could work, in the right hands. I imagine copyright issues kept them from using the Stay Puft brand, or maybe they're just so desperate to show they aren't just hijacking a franchise they have no love for. Look guys! It's... Ghost... man, G-ghostboy, the guy, you know, the one we all know and love, here he is, oh boy, what a franchise, huh?
It's pretty much exactly what one would imagine..it's the logo with teeth. spoiler just incase someone doesn't want to be spoiled I guess.
Spoiler
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiypZ_qVAAA-v8P.jpg)
Is that the actual action figures.....
Yes, yes they are.
What annoys me, apart from the misogynist argument, is when people say you can't judge the movie by the trailer. I mean, the purpose of a trailer is to gain your interest to see the movie, but if a trailer doesn't look good to me, then I won't want to see the movie. Simple. When did people forget everyone has the right not to like something? People don't even have to have a reason not to like something either.
Quote from: g2vd on May 23, 2016, 11:37:54 AM
Yes, yes they are.
wow, that is as generic as one could have imagined. Did they brown face a couple of the girls? Because I thought they were white?
Quote from: PsyKore on May 23, 2016, 11:50:53 AM
What annoys me, apart from the misogynist argument, is when people say you can't judge the movie by the trailer. I mean, the purpose of a trailer is to gain your interest to see the movie, but if a trailer doesn't look good to me, then I won't want to see the movie. Simple. When did people forget everyone has the right not to like something? People don't even have to have a reason not to like something either.
To play devils advocate I think they mean people who phrase their discontent as "This movie sucks" without the movie even hitting the theater vs "From what I've seen in the trailers I think this movie is going to majorly blow". Yea it ain't much but stating something sucks without seeing it is just as unfair as people demanding that we see something that we just don't want to based on the very content released who's sole intention is to motivate us to see the movie.
Yea I'm a softie, a lot and I mean a lot of people put a lot of effort into trying to make a movie... but at the end of the day it's just business and no matter how great a product may well be, if you f**k up the marketing; the products f**ked.
Yep, acting as if the movie might be better than the trailer is irrelevant. It may be, but that was their chance to get asses in seats. If they give me a bad impression of their product, it's them f**king up, not me being stubborn and quick to judge.
Yea, that is exactly what it is. Columbia Pictures straight up f**ked up and are now trying to blame anyone and everything else. Still if the movie is good chances are most of us would probably go and see it. So it's basically up to the quality of the film and word of mouth to get my ass into the theater.
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 23, 2016, 12:54:37 PM
Yea, that is exactly what it is. Columbia Pictures straight up f**ked up and are now trying to blame anyone and everything else. Still if the movie is good chances are most of us would probably go and see it. So it's basically up to the quality of the film and word of mouth to get my ass into the theater.
In Columbias defense, I don't think the misogyny shit is on their end. I haven't seen anything linking it to them. It's the progressive liberal media acting on their own I've seen, and they're desperate to make a martyr out of this.
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 23, 2016, 12:24:13 PM
Quote from: g2vd on May 23, 2016, 11:37:54 AM
Yes, yes they are.
wow, that is as generic as one could have imagined. Did they brown face a couple of the girls? Because I thought they were white?
You can see more pictures here.
http://news.toyark.com/2016/02/14/toy-fair-2016-mattel-ghostbusters-2016-195228 (http://news.toyark.com/2016/02/14/toy-fair-2016-mattel-ghostbusters-2016-195228)
I've been avoiding pretty much everything about this movie, because I don't really care for Ghostbusters (even the originals), but I saw a TV spot last night. I have to say, it looks pretty bad. There's nothing worse than an unfunny comedy, and that's the vibe I got from the spot.
Quote from: Ultramorph on May 23, 2016, 04:49:09 PM
I've been avoiding pretty much everything about this movie, because I don't really care for Ghostbusters (even the originals), but I saw a TV spot last night. I have to say, it looks pretty bad. There's nothing worse than an unfunny comedy, and that's the vibe I got from the spot.
Agreed. I mean with a bad movie you can still have fun with it like riffing on it or laughing at it, I had a lot of fun that way with Fant4stic it was actually pretty fun doing that. but I mean with a bad comedy..you just can't instead you are left with that awful silence where there should be a laugh.
Yeah, bad comedies are a bitch to review as well. There's only so many ways to say 'that wasn't funny'.
Now to throw some gasoline on the barn fire... is the LGBT cartel represented in any of the 4 main protagonist? Damn right I'm expecting a hot lesbian make out scene. Have fun with that.
I dunno, are there men or women of colour at Huffington Post?
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 23, 2016, 11:40:46 PM
Now to throw some gasoline on the barn fire... is the LGBT cartel represented in any of the 4 main protagonist? Damn right I'm expecting a hot lesbian make out scene. Have fun with that.
The first one had Zool....
Quote from: Novak 1334 on May 24, 2016, 05:57:26 AM
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 23, 2016, 11:40:46 PM
Now to throw some gasoline on the barn fire... is the LGBT cartel represented in any of the 4 main protagonist? Damn right I'm expecting a hot lesbian make out scene. Have fun with that.
The first one had Zool....
So the final boss of this movie is going to be a hot chick with really big tits... yes I am saying that Zool will be a sexy chick in this one.
Hot chick with a flat top. Take all my money
Zool played by Nicki Minaj, calling it now.
You guys are scary. :laugh:
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on May 24, 2016, 08:12:29 PM
Zool played by Nicki Minaj, calling it now.
Viggo played by Caitlyn Jenner
Grace Randolph clearly doesn't like it, she tries to hide it, but you can tell.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byjnGd7FEHc
Here are my problems with the new trailer.
- While the characters in the original were funny, it was dry wit, and it was their interactions with each other and in situations together that brought the comedy. They themselves weren't having a great time, just trying to make some money in a job like any other. It was only Ray who seemed to get some childish pleasure out of busting ghosts. The characters in this remake are written like those of an Adam Sandler movie. Individuals are wacky, stupid, and a fall from a great height or slammed against a wall and get straight back up like they didn't feel a thing. I see Melissa McCarthy did a cartwheel Matrix-style while zapping a ghost in one of the trailers... Just... no. Keep it grounded in reality as best you can with supernatural events.
- The ghosts look awful. I've seen lots of people say that it reminds them of the Scooby Doo movie with it's special effects but it's true, they really look dated. They remind me a bit of the ghosts in the 2009 video game. This was fine on my 360, but not in a current blockbuster. Did no-one learn anything for the praise the new Star Wars and Mad Max got for practical effects use?
- People at the rock concert are not afraid of the ghost dragon... thing. Some even get a selfie with it. I suppose they could explain it like the crowd think its a gig hologram like Tupac but are we meant to expect they are that dense? There is a problem when the only people who are scared of a ghost is the Ghostbusters themselves.
- The inevitable gender issue. I am fine with female ghostbusters and female actors taking centre stage. Rey was great in Star Wars, I found Furiosa a much more interesting protagonist than Max and the Alien franchise is my absolute favourite. But did we have to have such a major shift to the opposite end of the spectrum? Could 2 guys and 2 gals not have made up the team instead to please everyone? The only male star in this now is a bumbling idiot who, thanks to giving away too much in the trailer, gets possessed and becomes the movie's bad guy.
- Sony. God, these guys are just the worst. I read the leaked emails on this film, saw how much they simply wanted to make a quick buck, trivialising Ramis' death and seeing it as an opportunity, threatening Bill Murray with a lawsuit if he didn't appear for a cameo, deleting negative posts under their trailers and leaving only sexist bigotry and saying the negativity comes from that alone...
The approach to this movie seems to be to get a new generation into ghostbusters. But in doing so, have ignored the established fans. Deadpool showed studios that R rated movies are hits. I hope this shows that rehashing classics with little respect for the source material will be a financial disaster.
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/30/dan-aykroyd-says-new-ghostbusters-tops-the-originals (http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/30/dan-aykroyd-says-new-ghostbusters-tops-the-originals)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n5E7feJHw0
I wonder how much he got payed to shill this turd.
Then explain the trailers, Dan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvBCqpY3H2sAre nerds misogynist? I mean they are afraid of girls and gamers seem to be the same way... the movie still looks likes shit but I mean there may be a point.
Imagine you have a regular drinking location that you frequent. You've been going there for years, some of your favourite memories have taken place there. You know that when you go there you will get a friendly welcome in fun, reassuring surroundings.
Then one day you go in, The name above the bar is the same but suddenly its all different. There are neon lasers projected onto walls, smoke machines, foam makers and the place is full of women, apart from a brainless stripper on stage, who is topless and eating a lump of wood while the women cheer and scream, slipping on the floor and falling through windows.
You look across at a crystal cup that used to be mounted on the wall, must have had some historical significance. Maybe it was a trophy. Perhaps someone famous once drank from it. You don't know, but it's something symbolic of the place. Now it's being used to catch the vomit of one particular woman who's had a few too many.
You see one solidarity black woman in the corner, but decide to avoid her as she seems to be mentally unstable. The stripper begins taking a buzzsaw to his own arm while the women begin to cheer louder. You're miserable and covered with party foam. Which gets everywhere. In every crack.
You go outside and talk to the bouncer.
"What happened to this place??"
"It was changed."
"Why?"
"To accomodate a newer fresh audience. It's more progressive."
"But it was great the way it was! Why change it? Look in there! There are women smashing plates over each others heads, falling over, breaking through walls..."
"They are having fun aren't they?"
"... Well yes... But you don't understand. I LOVED this place. I absolutely loved it. So did so many people I know! I used to talk late into the night with people about this place! And it looks like a generic club now! You've stripped it of all its character. It looks so cheap! And yes people in there are having fun, but it's not my kind of fun!"
"Well maybe you are getting too old for this place, did you think of that?"
"No, it's not that at all! The place used to have an older demographic anyway. People grew up knowing this place. But it's completely changed it's target market, it's unfair to the regulars who come here. For one thing it's full of women..."
"Oh so THAT'S it, is it? Can't stand seeing women having fun? Women can party just as hard as guys. You know I encounter misogyny like yours all the time. You scum."
"WHAT?? It's not that they are women in there. I love women! It's just full of women going CRAZY. Were you handing out free cocaine at the door? They are off their TITS. There is one guy in there, true, but I don't think him and myself would get on. I watched him trying to feed a carrot to the condom vending machine. And where is Bill that used to help run this place?"
"He's still here. He cleans the crap off the walls at the end of the night."
"THAT'S what Bill is doing now?? He made this place! You can't make him a Janitor, he deserves more! Besides, I know Bill would absolutely despise working here! Why did he accept that position??"
"That's confidential. Look, this is the way it is now, so you better learn to like it. It's still the same place. You can either pay up, swallow that misplaced male ego and try and enjoy yourself or you can bugger off, you sexist prick."
You leave, but turn and look back at the place one last time. You feel the bass through the ground mixed with the never ending screams of hysterical women, and through the ever-changing tone of the glass windows, the silouette of projectile vomiting. You look up at the name of your once-loved home from home mounted above the door. It looks the same, but someone has taken it into photoshop and stuck a bevel emboss on it. It reads: GHOSTBUSTERS.
A single solitary tear rolls down your face as you walk home.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0mKXcg1.gif&hash=281f9d9307048cd845f5b00ecc099830ebb766fb)
sigh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ85g2Al1ZADoes anyone else think this is really shitty? Long time fans of a beloved movie hate the direction it's going, so the cast insult their target audience, calling them sad losers.
Are critics going to be scared to give it negative reviews? And are the cast going to apologise if the movie gets slammed? I've never seen anything like this before.
I wonder how more open the audience would have been if the new Ghostbusters were female supermodels...
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 10, 2016, 08:21:19 PM
I wonder how more open the audience would have been if the new Ghostbusters were female supermodels...
Bad jokes are bad jokes no matter who delivers them.
Quote from: DaddyYautja on Jun 10, 2016, 08:41:41 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 10, 2016, 08:21:19 PM
I wonder how more open the audience would have been if the new Ghostbusters were female supermodels...
Bad jokes are bad jokes no matter who delivers them.
I'd like to think that the hate would be even worse. Let's be honest, the Ghostbuster weren't exactly hot guys. The women and the properties of their characters are exact copies of their male leads. McCarthy's Venkman is probably as much of a creep as Murray's. None of whom are all that hot either. Inserting hot chicks would have really set off a firestorm.
My only complaint about this film is its a remake. Women have had starring roles in many films for the last 30+ years. I'm not familiar with any of the new leads except for Melissa and I'm still not sold on her because I don't think shes that funny. She plays the same kind of character in almost all of her movies. Spy I think was her best work. I hope this movie gives her an opportunity to be more then just the same. Other then that I hope I'm wrong that this is going to be another crappy waste of money remake.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffilmmusicreporter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F06%2Fghostbusters-score.jpg&hash=fdc7a600c724cc3468ad11b47b3dc52011f5c82c)
Does this mean the score is available? I'd be curious to hear it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=simxjM1l4VEHAHAHAHAHA She shot the Ghostbusters logo in the dick... IN THE DICK!!
Can't think of a better metaophor to sum up this movie.
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 15, 2016, 11:19:55 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=simxjM1l4VE
HAHAHAHAHA She shot the Ghostbusters logo in the dick... IN THE DICK!!
Can't think of a better metaophor to sum up this movie.
uhgah hagagagaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
I hesitated to believe what you wrote and then hesitated to watch the video out of fear that you were being literal. Oh boy, she shot it in the dick and then did a dick trust to mock it. Cinema surely has hit a new low.
I'm sooo hyped...not for the movie, but the reviews :)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.niketalk.com%2F5%2F58%2F900x900px-LL-58401ad8_latest.jpeg&hash=6444280543fc33405d88725a61f7f61ccb34a19b)
Oh gawd something just dawned on me...
If there's something strange
In your neighborhood
Who you gonna SHOOT IN THE DICK?
GHOSTBUSTERS
If there's something weird
and it don't look good
Who ya gonna SHOOT IN THE DICK?
GHOSTBUSTERS
I ain't afraid of no dicks
I ain't afraid of no dicks
If you're seeing things
running through your head
Who can ya SHOOT IN THE DICK?
GHOSTBUSTERS
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 15, 2016, 11:57:32 AM
http://cdn.niketalk.com/5/58/900x900px-LL-58401ad8_latest.jpeg
Yup...
Can't see any possible reason for having Stay-Puft in it, other than cheap fan service. As for the dick shot thing, I'd like to think this is as bad as it will get but I'm sure it won't be...
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClDEJtiUsAIv34_.jpg:large)
Quote from: ace3g on Jun 16, 2016, 11:56:04 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClDEJtiUsAIv34_.jpg:large)
Why is this still not cancelled?
Quote from: THE CITY HUNTER on Jun 16, 2016, 05:29:47 PM
Quote from: ace3g on Jun 16, 2016, 11:56:04 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClDEJtiUsAIv34_.jpg:large)
Why is this still not cancelled?
My god, Ray was right. They don't have dicks. :o
Wow, they actually advertised this in a way even I find in poor taste and I like the look of this more than the first.
Oh man just got back from seeing Finding Dory and those bastards ran back to back trailers and had paul fieg literally begging people to see the movie. That second trailer really hurt though, as in it was bad.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 18, 2016, 03:27:54 AM
Oh man just got back from seeing Finding Dory and those bastards ran back to back trailers and had paul fieg literally begging people to see the movie. That second trailer really hurt though, as in it was bad.
Was Finding Dory good?
Quote from: hfeldhaus on Jun 18, 2016, 03:35:38 AM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 18, 2016, 03:27:54 AM
Oh man just got back from seeing Finding Dory and those bastards ran back to back trailers and had paul fieg literally begging people to see the movie. That second trailer really hurt though, as in it was bad.
Was Finding Dory good?
Yea it was. It's definitely more kid-oriented tough. To be honest too much of it takes place inside of an Aquarium and even ventures out onto a Interstate Highway. Yea, that's all I'll say about that. Still it was fun. It may have been more fun to see it with the hundred of kids in the standard definition theaters. However had to go IMAX; there was only 9 of us total. :P
I leave for one day and Pixar infests a thread. :-\
He should have got it in the face. Then the rest of them should have slim-wrestled for the title.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jun 18, 2016, 12:39:31 PM
I leave for one day and Pixar infests a thread. :-\
I don't wanna overtly say it but I'm gonna anyways. Finding Dory is a way better girl power film than ghostbuster 3 ever will be. Why can't they put Dory in a fish bowl and semi-truck and have her capture some ghost instead.
...the f**k is this, Nickelodeon? Is this just a known thing that happens? "Welp, this hot new film is out, lets get someone involved into the orange room so he can get slimed"
...you know what rhymes with Nickelodeon? Here, I'll give you a hint. Dick Dick Dick Dick, na Dick Dick Dick, Dickelodeon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsLa_HuoWGsIt CAN'T be by coincidence.
How about a good old fashioned shotgun to the dick?
Full Official Ghostbusters theme tune:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AQ44nPrRTMI'm out. Out.
Ghostbusters PR levels on top as always as Tom Rothman, exec of Sony says hate for film is the best thing to ever happen to it.
http://screenrant.com/ghostbusters-reboot-hate/?utm_source=SR-FB-P&utm_medium=Social-Distribution&utm_campaign=SR-FB-P&view=lista
This might be true if everyone who says it looks garbage goes and sees it anyway. I really hope they don't.
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 23, 2016, 05:35:25 PM
Full Official Ghostbusters theme tune:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AQ44nPrRTM
I'm out. Out.
Quote
Kind of reminds me of the extreme ghostbusters theme
They really should have just adapted Extreme Ghostbusters instead. It had a diverse cast of a goth girl, a black guy, a wheelchair guy, and a hispanic guy, with an original team member as the mentor. Can you imagine if they adapted monsters from the show into a movie?
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi145.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fr205%2Fherooftime999%2FGITC2%2FXGgrundelesque.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=9f3596fcad28bbecaeb531647b86aec908243cdf)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi938.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad226%2Fhaketh4%2F1258869548165.jpg&hash=70a3ad1deec8292277d01785591ef39327762253)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi938.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad226%2Fhaketh4%2F1258869789500.jpg%7Eoriginal&hash=62ee74840141ab59fb7959dcdeab66fe74fa9c6d)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvignette3.wikia.nocookie.net%2Fghostbusters%2Fimages%2F1%2F18%2FTenebraug01.jpg%2Frevision%2Flatest%3Fcb%3D20110627043507&hash=9ed216fd914fd228684998a5d5685f7c96c84a6c)
Sony Pictures has announced that an animated spinoff of this year's reboot - called Ghostbusters: Ecto Force - is in the works, eyed to premiere in 2018.
Here's how Sony describes the upcoming show: "A brand new animated television series, Ghostbusters: Ecto Force, will further expand the Ghostbusters cinematic universe and focus on a new generation of Ghostbusters in the year 2050 who capture ghosts around the world with help from local teams - and some very cool gear! The younger-skewing Sony Pictures Animation project is being creatively spearheaded by Ivan Reitman and his production company Ghost Corps."
http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ghostbusters/news/a798529/ghostbusters-gets-cartoon-spinoff/
QuoteGhostbusters cinematic universe
Ughh.
Welcome to XXI Century :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is31GGfhz8o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is31GGfhz8o)
What the hell is the context of that? ^^^^^^
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 29, 2016, 12:43:14 PM
What the hell is the context of that? ^^^^^^
The context is: J A P A N
Quote from: Magegg on Jun 29, 2016, 12:42:59 AM
Welcome to XXI Century :o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is31GGfhz8o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is31GGfhz8o)
Freaking awesome. Better than f**king Fall Out Boy.
That is GLORIOUS
Quote from: frenchfries on Jun 29, 2016, 06:02:00 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 29, 2016, 12:51:11 PM
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 29, 2016, 12:43:14 PM
What the hell is the context of that? ^^^^^^
The context is: J A P A N
i think thats korean.
The Text is Japanese and it's from Sony Japan, however that is one odd dialect. It's Japanese but I can only understand half of it. Maybe it is Korean influenced.
From looking at the line up I see this movie doing well in its first week, since it has nothing that week to compete with its release. Week 2 on the other hand its going to get crushed by Ice Age: Collision Course, and Star Trek Beyond. Not to mention bad worth of mouth will sink it even faster.
If Ghostbusters 3 is actually bad it's not going to even cross the 40M opening barrier.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 29, 2016, 09:36:50 PM
Quote from: frenchfries on Jun 29, 2016, 06:02:00 PM
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 29, 2016, 12:51:11 PM
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jun 29, 2016, 12:43:14 PM
What the hell is the context of that? ^^^^^^
The context is: J A P A N
i think thats korean.
The Text is Japanese and it's from Sony Japan, however that is one odd dialect. It's Japanese but I can only understand half of it. Maybe it is Korean influenced.
I know for once the chubby girl of the video is from Hong Kong.
Quote from: genocyber on Jun 29, 2016, 11:52:27 PM
From looking at the line up I see this movie doing well in its first week, since it has nothing that week to compete with its release. Week 2 on the other hand its going to get crushed by Ice Age: Collision Course, and Star Trek Beyond. Not to mention bad worth of mouth will sink it even faster.
In its first week its still got to compete with now you see me 2,Tarzan,Ab fab the move,ice age 11 days later its going up against the BFG and Star trek. They should have gone for a mid august release since their is nothing out apart from suicide squard at beginning of august it would probably fair better against Ben hur,Popstar,David Brent and the purge.
So that's the female Slimer confirmed in released promo stuff. Which proves without a shadow of a doubt that the leaked synopsis was all true. The female slimer part seemed the most dumb, and I was thinking "Nah, that can't be a thing" but it is. Slimer acts up and is kept in check by his green gf. I bet she is even holding a phantom rolling pin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6rS2wyVjFI
Hot. Let's see some Rule34 of that shit.
I been seeing Ghostbusters plastered all over everything in the stores now. Tons of random grocery store items now coming with free tickets to go see it. Its gone past sad to pathetic on how hard they are trying to shove this turd down audiences throats. Where was this big advertising with Independence Day 2?
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jul 07, 2016, 02:11:17 PM
So that's the female Slimer confirmed in released promo stuff. Which proves without a shadow of a doubt that the leaked synopsis was all true. The female slimer part seemed the most dumb, and I was thinking "Nah, that can't be a thing" but it is. Slimer acts up and is kept in check by his green gf. I bet she is even holding a phantom rolling pin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6rS2wyVjFI
Slimer found himself some poontang? I can dig that. I mean what's wrong with it. For a moment I thought you meant slimer too was now a chick.
I really feel the theme of this movie was gender swap. Which could have worked. All the girls look like the dudes they are trying to play but the jokes are all just flat as f**k and cliche.
What gave you that impression haha.... But they did it completely wrong. Janine wasn't mentally challenged. The Ghostbusters weren't clumsy morons. Bill Murray never tried to crowd surf to fall on his ass and ask 'So is that because I'm Caucasian or because I have a penis?'
And there is nothing wrong with Slimer getting some ectoplasm action. But it does mean that the entire leaked synopsis is legit, which is bad for fans of a good story.
Are there any reviews out yet? It doesn't bode well that there are no advanced previews - A good indication that they have no faith in the movie.
the review embargo gets lifted on sunday so only 2 days to go to see how it goes down
Ok, I saw it last night. I'll tell you what you already know... It's nowhere near as good as the original, duh. I'll spill more thoughts on Sunday.
You must of saw it for free.
Lol
Quote from: GQSioux on Jul 08, 2016, 09:31:05 PM
Ok, I saw it last night. I'll tell you what you already know... It's nowhere near as good as the original, duh. I'll spill more thoughts on Sunday.
That's saying a lot because it implies that it's not a steaming pile of feces.
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
Quote from: Xan21 on Jul 09, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
People are still saying these things? I guess it'll endure long after the film is released; I can already see some publications giving good reviews to save themselves some embarrasment, especially after going so ludicrously heavily after people like James Rolfe.
Someone put up an early review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Pvk70Gx6c
Jeesh this guy definately got his balls jolted before filming the review.
The final bit where they take down the boss ghost by shooting him in the balls pretty much says it all if ask me (and again, why would a ghost be affected by that? Do ghosts have balls?).
Why would a full sized ghost version of the Ghostbusters logo have a set of male genitals?
http://nypost.com/2016/07/08/secret-life-of-pets-has-ghostbusters-scared-straight/
Quote from: Xan21 on Jul 09, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
...yeah. Yeah, thats the one. Our knees are just soggy and we're scurred. Or maybe we're just cringing at genuinely unfunny female actresses hijacking something they're not talented enough to make themselves.
But nuh, I'm just threatened by this. Definitely.
Quote from: Xan21 on Jul 09, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
Soccer is boring no matter who or what plays it. Not even puppies or your own kids can make soccer palatable. :P
They should have sold the film as a genderbender sex romp and everyone would have been thrilled. Yea and I mean just that, have the original guys through ghost magic become chicks in the movie. A terminator genisys kind of thing.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jul 09, 2016, 09:40:45 PM
Quote from: Xan21 on Jul 09, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
Soccer is boring no matter who or what plays it. Not even puppies or your own kids can make soccer palatable. :P
They should have sold the film as a genderbender sex romp and everyone would have been thrilled. Yea and I mean just that, have the original guys through ghost magic become chicks in the movie. A terminator genisys kind of thing.
Soccer boring? You must have less sport than a Cooking Channel. You said that because in your country its not very played but watch Argentinian league and all the matches are incredible
Quote from: Xan21 on Jul 09, 2016, 01:44:08 PM
Just fanboys who are Always like- Women aren't funny...Same thing when guys have to watch female soccer, It diminishes the power of their manhood.
The controversy over this project has zero to do with the primary characters' gender and everything to do with it looking like it'll be around the quality of '
Pixels'.
Like many, I had no problem with it being an all-female cast. The original played off the 'slacker science fraternity' vibe and I could see a female cast doing that just as well (providing it's cast and written well enough, which is the same necessity as for a male cast). If this was because of sexist prejudice, I would't have cringed when I heard about the Channing Tatum spin-off rumour, which I regarded as just as ill-advised.
If this fails as hard as all the indications were threatening it would, it won't be because of the false sexism narrative. It'll be because it's simply a bad film.
Amy Pascal's back-stabbing of Reitman may well have cursed this from the start.
QuoteThe controversy over this project has zero to do with the primary characters' gender-
Oh, it's about gender for me, but not because the leads are female, it's that they hold their gender up like a shield against criticism. I personally don't care about the movie. I don't really like Ghostbusters. I watched it once and enjoyed myself and will probably never watch it again.
I have no horse in this race, I just see a franchise many people liked being hijacked by talentless c**ts with no understanding, love or appreciation of the property, and then shaming and shouting down any criticism. They're not here for Ghostbusters, or its fans, they're here for themselves.
This is absolutely about gender politics, and
they made it that way. Untalented Pigharpies like these can't create, they just move into a space someone else already worked for and make it theirs. I hold nothing but contempt for this film, and I don't even care about Ghostbusters.
I think this is probably about as good as it will get quite frankly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CeCiTwuyWq0Meanwhile, Sony are now desperately trying to sell this movie to male cinema goers. Maybe you should of thought about that before taking the movie in this direction hmmm
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-female-reboot-marketing-challenges-1201810847/ (http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-female-reboot-marketing-challenges-1201810847/)
Everything which has come out, so far, seems to indicate that original leaked post on Reddit was 100% legitimate.
Looks like they edited out the dance number, but that it was still definitely filmed.
Quote from: Sabby on Jul 10, 2016, 03:20:52 AM
QuoteThe controversy over this project has zero to do with the primary characters' gender-
Oh, it's about gender for me, but not because the leads are female, it's that they hold their gender up like a shield against criticism. I personally don't care about the movie. I don't really like Ghostbusters. I watched it once and enjoyed myself and will probably never watch it again.
I have no horse in this race, I just see a franchise many people liked being hijacked by talentless c**ts with no understanding, love or appreciation of the property, and then shaming and shouting down any criticism. They're not here for Ghostbusters, or its fans, they're here for themselves.
This is absolutely about gender politics, and they made it that way. Untalented Pigharpies like these can't create, they just move into a space someone else already worked for and make it theirs. I hold nothing but contempt for this film, and I don't even care about Ghostbusters.
Unfortunately most of the entertainment media is firmly on the "You're all sexist" side of the arguement:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F0U55Db8.jpg&hash=04371452a4ddb5738fda68af356533217974efd8) (http://imgur.com/0U55Db8)
Faraci told another Tweeter who disagreed that "you have fetal alcohol syndrome". He's a big name in internet movie reviewing. This is their attitude against
all criticism of the movie ::)
I work at a movie theater, you guys want me to get some genuine audience reactions unfiltered next week?
ign review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/07/10/ghostbusters-review-2
Quote from: mez86 on Jul 10, 2016, 07:45:46 PM
ign review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/07/10/ghostbusters-review-2
The same IGN that gave Alien: Isolation a 5.9? Yeah no
Quote from: mez86 on Jul 10, 2016, 07:45:46 PM
ign review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/07/10/ghostbusters-review-2
10/10
That ign reviews hits this movies problem right in the eye; paul fiegs comedy is the problem.
Get the toys before they're gone lol!
http://pagesix.com/2016/07/07/ghostbusters-toys-are-already-on-the-clearance-rack/
Paul Fieg's comedy is just taking Larry the Cable Guy and giving him a vagina and calling it progressive.
Quote from: Valaquen on Jul 10, 2016, 03:42:55 PM
Faraci told another Tweeter who disagreed that "you have fetal alcohol syndrome". He's a big name in internet movie reviewing. This is their attitude against all criticism of the movie ::)
Ableism! Especially ironic coming from circles that think it's sexist to not sell pregnant women alcohol. Remember guys, you can f**k up a life your responsible for simply to avoid being stressed out, but if that kid grows up to not share your values in their entirety, they're scum.
Hey hey hey! I like Larry The Cable Guy! 8)
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 11, 2016, 01:07:52 AM
Hey hey hey! I like Larry The Cable Guy! 8)
Jingle All The Way 2 is the Citizen Kane of Christmas movies
Quote from: PVTDukeMorrison on Jul 10, 2016, 08:13:38 PM
Quote from: mez86 on Jul 10, 2016, 07:45:46 PM
ign review
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/07/10/ghostbusters-review-2
The same IGN that gave Alien: Isolation a 5.9? Yeah no
There is too much space man! 5.9/10.
Don't know this guy as a Youtuber but here is one of the few advance video reviews.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Pvk70Gx6c
I'm waiting for Brads Midnight Screening.
74% approval on Rotten Tomatoes so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qyoxdu694 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qyoxdu694)
Rut roh!! Sony exposed??!!
http://furiousfanboys.com/2016/07/sony-may-produced-positive-ghostbusters-review-youtube/
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 11, 2016, 03:57:47 PM
74% approval on Rotten Tomatoes so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qyoxdu694 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5qyoxdu694)
Yet 3.7/10 on IMDb
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 11, 2016, 04:28:35 PMYet 3.7/10 on IMDb
Which means obvious hate posting and fake reviews since the movie hasn't even been released for the general audience.
So I have just come in from watching this and to be honest with you guys I went in with reaily low expections after the trailers and I thought I be leaving the cinema tonight ready to bash the shit out off it. But I enjoyed its funny the cast is great and yes that includes Melissa McCarthy (not a big fan of hers). I love the raw GB equipment and how they improve it over course off the film. My only problem with the film is the Bad guy which reaily lets this film down a better villain would have improved this film.
7/10
I hope this film does well enough for a sequel because I woulnd mind seeing another outing for the Female GB team.
Oh and if your going to the cinema to watch this go see it in 3D its the best 3d film since avatar it has great depth and it reaily does pop off the screen with the proton beams and ectoplasm flying out the screen if 3d films had been this good over the years it wouldn't be dying in the cinema or at home.
Quote from: mez86 on Jul 11, 2016, 10:10:05 PM
So I have just come in from watching this and to be honest with you guys I went in with reaily low expections after the trailers and I thought I be leaving the cinema tonight ready to bash the shit out off it. But I enjoyed its funny the cast is great and yes that includes Melissa McCarthy (not a big fan of hers). I love the raw GB equipment and how they improve it over course off the film. My only problem with the film is the Bad guy which reaily lets this film down a better villain would have improved this film.
7/10
I hope this film does well enough for a sequel because I woulnd mind seeing another outing for the Female GB team.
Oh and if your going to the cinema to watch this go see it in 3D its the best 3d film since avatar it has great depth and it reaily does pop off the screen with the proton beams and ectoplasm flying out the screen if 3d films had been this good over the years it wouldn't be dying in the cinema or at home.
How much did Sony pay you? ;D
I'm going to see it at the weekend, my expectations have been low ever since it was announced, and the horrible marketing campaign, along with Paul Feig's arrogance hasn't helped. But I love movies, and I'm not one to bash the final product without seeing it first
The trailers in IMAX 3D looked fantastic. I have no problem with the chickbusters, nor am I all that big of a ghostbusters fan. I just don't think the comedy seen is all that great and Sony has too much influence on the reviewing community. Well that's not just Sony. Still on the fence. I might wait for a few more reviews but at the same time there isn't much else to do this weekend.
I'm torn on giving it a marginal 3/5 or 2.5/5.
There's a lot to like, but it's ultimately a middle of the road movie. I loved the opening. The 3D, ghost designs and special FX are actually quite good. I think, for the most part, the 4 girls have good chemistry but man oh man, did a good chunk of the jokes fall flat. If you've seen the trailers, you know some of the moments I'm talking about--like the crowd surfing joke in particular. Leslie Jones is basically a loud, walking stereotype. She has a few lines that are funny, but almost everything with her ends with an exclamation point which becomes a bit old and grating. The villain too (a cliche evil nerd), is ultimately weak, and I'm not even 100% sure why the hell he was doing what he was doing, but it paves the way for a weak climax. I really do want to see where they take this franchise though. The new universe and characters are likable enough to deserve a sequel as well as a better script. There was so much potential but it never quite took off. It's at least better than Ghostbusters 2 but nowhere near as great or quotable as the original.
But relax, it's not a total abysmal failure. Harold Ramis is not rolling in his grave right now. Go in with low expectations and you'll likely enjoy it. I'd seriously like to see the sequel fall into the hands of someone like writer/director Shane Black.
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 11, 2016, 06:50:52 PM
Which means obvious hate posting and fake reviews since the movie hasn't even been released for the general audience.
There have been advanced screenings in the US and it was released on Sunday, here in the UK.
the annoying thing about reviews for this movie is if you hate it then you are called sexist and if you like it then ppl claim that sony paid you. Cant people just have different opinions?
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Jul 12, 2016, 12:47:45 AM
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 11, 2016, 06:50:52 PM
Which means obvious hate posting and fake reviews since the movie hasn't even been released for the general audience.
There have been advanced screenings in the US and it was released on Sunday, here in the UK.
But that's not who're currently down-voting the film en masse on IMDB. You only have to glimpse at the message board to see the down-voting campaign in progress. There are pleas to rate the film as low as 1 from many who openly admit they have no intention to see it. The IMDB score is
far from accurate and probably wont be for some time.
Quote from: frenchfries on Jul 12, 2016, 12:51:11 AM
the annoying thing about reviews for this movie is if you hate it then you are called sexist and if you like it then ppl claim that sony paid you. Cant people just have different opinions?
In a perfect world.
NY Times review sums up the man bashing attitude and biased views that many reviews have been showing. This is why its got a good score on RT, guilt tripping people into liking the film. The headline says it all...undercurrent of politics.
Our 'Ghostbusters' Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html?_r=0
This is the thing, most reviews seem to be, its OK, not as bad as expected, average fluff.
But is that good enough for a reboot of the Ghostbusters franchise? no. That is basically accepting mediocrity which will thusly lead to yet more mediocrity. For things to change in Hollywood people need to vote with their wallets, alas people just don't learn and this is why we keep getting garbage, and there's been plenty of that this year.
(Had no clue it was out here in the UK now).
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jul 11, 2016, 11:59:45 PM
The trailers in IMAX 3D looked fantastic. I have no problem with the chickbusters, nor am I all that big of a ghostbusters fan. I just don't think the comedy seen is all that great.
I'm in the same boat. The lass really wants to go see it though so I imagine I'll watch it some point this week.
Pretty much the vibe I'm getting from this film, average.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfgw714wR0E
Oooh, Sargon. Thanks for the link, wouldn't have thought to check for it.
'Ghostbusters' Haters Are Spamming IMDb With Low Ratings
http://screencrush.com/ghostbusters-imdb-what-the/
As expected.
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
And so what? Does it affect your life in some way that a movie exists?
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 07:57:23 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
And so what? Does it affect your life in some way that a movie exists?
Ignoring a growing tumor does not make it go away, Magegg.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 08:03:51 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 07:57:23 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
And so what? Does it affect your life in some way that a movie exists?
Ignoring a growing tumor does not make it go away, Magegg.
A tumor is something that hurts, destroys and ruins something. In this case, it only destroys "imaginary things", so yes, if you ignore it it won't hurt you.
Lol. I hope they remake everything. Alien, Predator, Terminator, Jurassic Park, Jaws, Back to the Future, Indiana Jones, Star Wars (Eps. IV-VI), everything.
I hope they remake literally every good movie and I hope it's all literally shit so as to destroy your childhood. Bonus points if they're all-female remakes.
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 08:25:52 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 08:03:51 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 07:57:23 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
And so what? Does it affect your life in some way that a movie exists?
Ignoring a growing tumor does not make it go away, Magegg.
A tumor is something that hurts, destroys and ruins something. In this case, it only destroys "imaginary things", so yes, if you ignore it it won't hurt you.
There is nothing imaginary about works of cinematic art being ruined one after another in the name of creative laziness, and a quick buck and being expected to not care. Keeping quiet about bastardizations of great films only advocates more like it to be made down the road.
Works of art only have as much meaning as you're willing to give them. If you don't see works of art that offend you, they're powerless. Mediocrity isn't a status quo to be satisfied with, but I'm of the opinion that hardly anything in the cinematic world from the last decade is worth preserving. Why would a Back to the Future remake be any different, or matter? Just forget it exists and move on.
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 08:25:52 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 08:03:51 PM
Quote from: Magegg on Jul 12, 2016, 07:57:23 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
And so what? Does it affect your life in some way that a movie exists?
Ignoring a growing tumor does not make it go away, Magegg.
A tumor is something that hurts, destroys and ruins something. In this case, it only destroys "imaginary things", so yes, if you ignore it it won't hurt you.
On the contrary, it hurts the heritage of past times. It's insulting and lowers standards.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/back-to-the-future/remake-sequel-robert-zemeckis/
Because almost all remakes of the past decade have been utter shit. Ignoring them isn't stopping Hollywood from making more. I'm sorry, but I cant help but feel slightly pissed when I see something I liked be badly handled by idiots who are just in it for the money and care nothing about the finished product. Sure the original will always be there, but the idea of a remake is to improve on an old idea and bring something new and interesting. It never needed to be made if you cant meet these requirements.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 09:02:09 PM
There is nothing imaginary about works of cinematic art being ruined one after another in the name of creative laziness,
Was Alien ruined by Alien vs Predator or Requiem?
Was The Terminator and T2:JD ruined by T3, Salvation or Genisys?
Was Robocop ruined by it's remake?
Was Total Recall for that matter?
Was Poltergeist?
Was Die Hard ruined by A Good Day to Die Hard?
Was Jaws ruined by Jaws 3D or Jaws The Revenge?
The answer to all of these questions is a resounding 'No'. They're still there and highly regarded. If you don't like a remake/ reboot, take the advice of Lord Humungus and 'just walk away'. Even if others like what you do not, their success still does
nothing to harm the originals unless you make them. Don't get me wrong, a bad film is a bad film and should rightly be criticised as such and with venom if warranted. But this 'you're destroying a legacy/ my childhood/ cinematic art' argument in regards to remakes or sequels is childish.
https://twitter.com/Uptomyknees/status/752922178295730177
So what I'm getting out of this is that as long as the original was good, its perfectly fine to make as many garbage sequels and reboots and drive the name into the f**king ground. There is a certain thing that exists called quality control, and its clearly not being implemented as much as it needs to. Do not apologize for mediocrity.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 11:22:07 PM
So what I'm getting out of this is that as long as the original was good, its perfectly fine to make as many garbage sequels and reboots and drive the name into the f**king ground.
No one said that.
People only pay ridiculous money for original art work; no one is clamoring to buy cheap knock offs. However I can see genocyber's point; how will film ever be able to escape the stigma of being second rate art, if it's so easy to mass produce lesser material. Film still isn't regarded as high art, no matter how many organizations claim it is. To me it is an art form. However to put it another way, no one cares who made the canvas or where it came from when a Picasso goes up to bid. Films of old took a few dozen people to make, today, it's thousands. Of course only a hand full ever get proper credit.
Although another way to look at it is like this, my ghostbusters will always be better than yours. :P
Quote from: Gazz on Jul 12, 2016, 11:41:54 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 11:22:07 PM
So what I'm getting out of this is that as long as the original was good, its perfectly fine to make as many garbage sequels and reboots and drive the name into the f**king ground.
No one said that.
Why not? I'm perfectly okay with that. Future work doesn't have any bearing on past relevance if you don't allow it to. No one jumped off a bridge because A:CM retconned Hicks back onto LV-426. If Alien 5 retcons Alien3 and A:R, will anyone care? Likely not.
It shouldn't matter to you how many shitty sequels, remakes, or reboots come out of a franchise, even if they spit on the original's name. Hell, even the Ghostbusters (1984) we know was a remake/reboot. No matter how much future shlock comes out, it'll never change the quality of the one you like. Did Godfather Pt. 3 ruin Godfather Pt. 1? No. Grow up.
Spoken like a true consumer whore.
Whatever helps you sleep at night. At least I don't get pissed off about petty shit like remakes/reboots/sequels of movies that were merely decent. 8)
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 07:32:55 PM
You realize the more and money is given to this, the closer we get to a Back to the Future remake.
Exactly, how many times do people have to be burnt before they actually learn? How many times do we have to go down this ridiculous route?? Its the same story every bloody time! I could list all the recent shoddy reboots, remakes and sequels but there's no point, people just don't learn.
Apart from some rather questionable, positive, official site reviews with obvious political undercurrents (NY Times, Salon etc...), most everything I've seen on Facebook, You-Tube and other forums all say the same thing. Average and forgettable, not as terrible as we all expected.
But that isn't good! This isn't what we should be settling for with for a reboot of one of the best films of the 80's. This is why people shouldn't be giving money to Sony because it just encourages more poor reboots/sequels/remakes etc...
QuoteIf Alien 5 retcons Alien3 and A:R, will anyone care? Likely not.
I will so that statement is wrong.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 13, 2016, 02:06:31 AM
QuoteIf Alien 5 retcons Alien3 and A:R, will anyone care? Likely not.
I will so that statement is wrong.
Agree +1
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 13, 2016, 02:08:37 AM
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 13, 2016, 02:06:31 AM
QuoteIf Alien 5 retcons Alien3 and A:R, will anyone care? Likely not.
I will so that statement is wrong.
Agree +1
You'll all still watch the movie and that's enough for the film companies.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 13, 2016, 02:06:31 AM
QuoteIf Alien 5 retcons Alien3 and A:R, will anyone care? Likely not.
I will so that statement is wrong.
You know when a toy company dedicates an entire range to 'ALIEN 3' that more than just one person cares.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fep.yimg.com%2Fay%2Fdragonballzcentral%2Fneca-aliens-3-aliens-series-8-7-set-of-3-action-figures-ripley-commando-brown-gray-dog-aliens-pre-order-ships-june-2.jpg&hash=7d9bb15c8357b98b1d3b3c99f734c89ccb9dcad6)
Don't underestimate how many people are fans of both these movies. 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection' have a massive following. Otherwise why would NECA manufacture this series?
VIVA La Franchise in its Entirety! - and not just piecemeal fannish bigotry!
- - -
As for the new 'Ghostbusters'... I'm not in a hurry to see it. Eventually, yes, but probably once it hits Foxtel or something. It looks like a 'by the numbers' updated interpretation with women cast in the same roles we've seen before without a Hell of a lot new to offer.
-Windebieste.
This is the start of a Civil War: The war against remakes. The 21st century needs to get it's shit together and make its own damn content; instead of riding coattails on the 20 century's material. I can't wait to see Alien 3.2... when it retcons A3 and AR the shit will hit the fan full speed.
I digress, I can't wait to see 50 cent play Marty Mcfly in the Back to the Future remake. Doc Brown... shit Christopher Lloyd can pull it off. :laugh:
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 13, 2016, 02:18:01 AM
Listen and learn...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PS7CgXHxps
19:13: "Or you just forget about the second." Wow, that video answered everyone's problem.
Quote from: windebieste on Jul 13, 2016, 02:38:10 AMYou know when a toy company dedicates an entire range to 'ALIEN 3' that more than just one person cares.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fep.yimg.com%2Fay%2Fdragonballzcentral%2Fneca-aliens-3-aliens-series-8-7-set-of-3-action-figures-ripley-commando-brown-gray-dog-aliens-pre-order-ships-june-2.jpg&hash=7d9bb15c8357b98b1d3b3c99f734c89ccb9dcad6)
Don't underestimate how many people are fans of both these movies. 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection' have a massive following. Otherwise why would NECA manufacture this series?
VIVA La Franchise in its Entirety! - and not just piecemeal fannish bigotry!
I meant to say that people will not care enough to boycott the movie with their money by not seeing it, which is practically the only way consumers tell companies what they want. Just look at the Alien 5 category here on AvP Galaxy. People are stoked to see the potential return of Ripley with Hicks and Newt. I'm sure many people will be
disappointed but they won't be emotionally crushed or devastated to the extent that I think genocyber is. I'm pretty sure everyone here would still watch Alien 5 if it retconned Alien3 and Alien: Resurrection, which I think most people agree would actually be better for the series. Also, you obviously know those toys were manufactured back when Alien3 and Alien: Resurrection were still "canon." Don't you think that if Alien 5 retconned Alien3 and A:R, they'd make toys for that too?
I'm sure there are enough contradictory things in the extended universe/comic books/novelizations/films of Alien/Predator/AvP that people already choose what they want to believe. That's all I'm saying. I won't "care" (i.e. it won't be a huge crushing blow to me and destroy my love of the series) if Alien 5 retcons certain films or is a steaming pile of goat shit. It shouldn't affect your appreciation of the other movies, and if it pisses someone off so much that they refuse to outright see it, well, good for them for sticking to their guns I suppose but it ultimately displays immaturity and an unhealthy fixation with a canonic, set interpretation of a fictional series in a fictional universe.
Quotewhich I think most people agree would actually be better for the series. Also, you obviously know those toys were manufactured back when Alien3 and Alien: Resurrection were still "canon." Don't you think that if Alien 5 retconned Alien3 and A:R, they'd make toys for that too?
You couldn't make this sound snobbier if you teamed up with Chris Stuckman, Renegade Cut, Screen Junkies, Plinkett, and CinemaSins. That is something Brian Singer does and thanks to him I no longer have interest in X-Men movies.
Don't you think that they'll make toys if 'ALIEN 5' doesn't retcon anything?
Coz that's an option, too. :P
A much better one.
-Windebieste.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 13, 2016, 03:04:43 AM
You couldn't make this sound snobbier if you teamed up with Chris Stuckman, Renegade Cut, Screen Junkies, Plinkett, and CinemaSins. That is something Brian Singer does and thanks to him I no longer have interest in X-Men movies.
Is it not true that we've been hearing rumours about Alien 5 being a continuation from Aliens rather than Alien: Resurrection? Is it not true that most people consider Alien: Resurrection garbage? Companies want to make the biggest draw to theaters that they can; if it means stepping over the integrity of a fan-appreciated franchise, they will. And sorry for my
personal opinion that rebooting the franchise from where Aliens ended instead of where Alien: Resurrection left off would be a good idea. Tell me something, do you want to see Alien: Resurrection 2?
Also, I don't know who any of those snobs are but if you're trying to insult me because I'm rooted in reality, you can't see the obvious truth. If you don't believe that there will be toys based on whatever creations they make in Alien 5
if it's a good enough movie, then it doesn't matter what they do to Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection, they're going to "break canon" and make those toys. Not that a grown man or woman should be playing with toys in the first place. How's that for a snobbish comment?
Quote from: windebieste on Jul 13, 2016, 03:16:49 AM
Don't you think that they'll make toys if 'ALIEN 5' doesn't retcon anything?
So you're in the camp that wants to see an Alien: Resurrection 2, as well?
Toy companies are in the business of making money. They'll make toys regardless of how the canon is affected, whether movies are retconned or not. My point is that they'll make whatever toys if there's a demand for it. The mere fact that A3 and A:R toys exist isn't going to dissuade a company from making new toys to accommodate a market demand. A toy company especially isn't going to care about maintaining the integrity of a film franchise just because it already released retconned products. Those toys sold in the 90s. Now? I don't think so much. From a company perspective, Alien 5 products are the way forward, not sticking to A3/A:R products.
We have yet to see how Fox deals with Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection, so talking about it now is really a moot point. My major point, and this ties it back to Ghostbusters (2016), is that, by and large, we're bigger Aliens fans than is the average person, and even if Alien 5 retcons Alien 3 and/or Alien: Resurrection, I think most of us will still see it so we can judge for ourselves if it's any good, but technically if we don't like it, the only way we can really try to tell the studios that we don't like the decision is to pull a James Rolfe and not see it. Or if you don't like it, just ignore it. What a concept.
I'm in the camp that believes a retcon is completely unnecessary.
I believe 'ALIEN 5' could easily be made without the need to resurrect deceased characters. It's the only grievance I have with Blomkamp's proposal. Dead characters should stay that way. Otherwise I am fully supportive of him making 'ALIEN 5'.
Most people want to see an action movie featuring xenos gunned down by USCM and they don't really care who is holding the pulse rifles just so long as acid blood is being spilt onscreen. Retconning half the series just to accommodate Ripley, Hicks and Newt is just absurd.
I would love to see the series work as a whole - and not the segmented, broken and discontinuous mess that Blomkamp currently proposes.
-Windebieste.
I take A:R any day insted of yet another reharsh of old film. That`s how I see Blokamp`s Aliens 2.
Quote from: Olde on Jul 13, 2016, 01:22:24 AM
Quote from: Gazz on Jul 12, 2016, 11:41:54 PM
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 12, 2016, 11:22:07 PM
So what I'm getting out of this is that as long as the original was good, its perfectly fine to make as many garbage sequels and reboots and drive the name into the f**king ground.
No one said that.
Why not? I'm perfectly okay with that. Future work doesn't have any bearing on past relevance if you don't allow it to.
I said as much two posts ago and provided a list. History has told us that no amount of sequels/ reboots/ remakes have any impact on films that are regarded as genuine classics. But in regards to us being happy about garbage films in general (regardless of whether they're sequels/ reboots), I don't believe
anyone said that. People still have a right to criticise and complain.
I have however said that the 'you've ruined cinematic art/ my childhood with a naff sequel or reboot' is an argument that's both childish and largely unfounded.
QuoteIs it not true that we've been hearing rumours about Alien 5 being a continuation from Aliens rather than Alien: Resurrection?
And weren't said rumors shot down? If it is true that only makes Alien 5 crass.
QuoteIs it not true that most people consider Alien: Resurrection garbage?
Most people don't even know how their own government functions, Shakesphere's Julius Caesar taught us that most people are stupid and are not to be trusted.
QuoteTell me something, do you want to see Alien: Resurrection 2?
Yes.
Quoteif you're trying to insult me because I'm rooted in reality
I'm not, I'm fighting snobbery and the delusion of "X and Y are bad because eeeeehhhhh".
QuoteIf you don't believe that there will be toys based on whatever creations they make in Alien 5 if it's a good enough movie
I never once even IMPLIED this.
QuoteHow's that for a snobbish comment?
"I'm pro-breaking continuity" might have something to do with it.
I'm no mod but the topic has to change.
QuoteIts all over...
Except it isn't even opening weekend yet so this statement is false.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 13, 2016, 03:15:30 PM
QuoteIts all over...
Except it isn't even opening weekend yet so this statement is false.
I jest of course, but JJ and Stuckmann have huge followings.
Just because something has a huge following does not mean they are credible. BTW Hubbs, if you like Stuckman so much, why not make a topic for just him?
Everyone shut up and enjoy pug Slimer
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Frarg1Yl.jpg&hash=a4a9992ea6f93a1775802998a9944550817f97e6)
Damn, Roeper really laid into the movie. Both stuckman and jahn gave it mediocre grade reviews... yet Roeper pulled his pants down and shat all over the tickets on a Chicago street. Guess that is his job, plus I think he was wasted... and he still hated the movie.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/13/12179838/ghostbusters-china-release-foreign-box-office
China isn't even going to screen the movie.
This will hugely impact overseas sales projections (and maybe, if we're lucky, get Hollywood to realise that, between this and banning anything with time-travel in it, maybe investment from a Communist police state should be steered away from).
It's also indicative of Sony's marketing department being so disorganised that they not only didn't check this beforehand, but decided the ideal solution would be to rename it...
To this.
http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2016/07/13/ghostbusters-gets-wacky-new-title-to-appease-censors-in-china-which-probably-wont-release-it-anyway
"Who ya' gonna' call?! Super Power Dare Die Team!"
:laugh:
He is Fieg-o! You are like the buzzing of flies to him...!
Interesting little piece that shows how this movie has become a political battle between feminists/the left, and nerds/(so called) sexists and haters.
https://medium.com/@J_Rosenfield/please-dont-see-ghostbusters-to-make-a-point-8382584353a#.68opr4krq
Personally I don't want the film to make tonnes of money because it merely encourages the clueless in Hollywood to make even more crap reboots and remakes. Personally I think we've had just about enough of these for now...Robocop, Total Recall, Poltergeist, Point Break etc...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1851RuJv_YUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-Z1qzaViqQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wf-XBng81SA
Saw it. It's fun. Not particularly deep, and I wish there was more of a focus on McCarthy's relationship with Wiig. But the cast has great chemistry, especially Jones, Hemsworth, and McKinnon. My god is McKinnon great in this.
The third act feels a little stale at times-- an action scene feels kind of meh until McKinnon takes over, for instance-- but overall it's a lot of fizzy fun.
Quote from: Alienseseses on Jul 15, 2016, 04:02:23 AM
Saw it. It's fun. Not particularly deep, and I wish there was more of a focus on McCarthy's relationship with Wiig. But the cast has great chemistry, especially Jones, Hemsworth, and McKinnon. My god is McKinnon great in this.
The third act feels a little stale at times-- an action scene feels kind of meh until McKinnon takes over, for instance-- but overall it's a lot of fizzy fun.
No it wasn't. I don't usally say things like this but... for what my opinion is worth. Do not see this movie. I did and I'm regretting it. If you are a fan of NB Alien 5 concept, leave as soon as the credits roll or else.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Jul 15, 2016, 08:10:10 AM
Quote from: Alienseseses on Jul 15, 2016, 04:02:23 AM
Saw it. It's fun. Not particularly deep, and I wish there was more of a focus on McCarthy's relationship with Wiig. But the cast has great chemistry, especially Jones, Hemsworth, and McKinnon. My god is McKinnon great in this.
The third act feels a little stale at times-- an action scene feels kind of meh until McKinnon takes over, for instance-- but overall it's a lot of fizzy fun.
No it wasn't. I don't usally say things like this but... for what my opinion is worth. Do not see this movie. I did and I'm regretting it. If you are a fan of NB Alien 5 concept, leave as soon as the credits roll or else.
What's Alien 5 gotta do with this? Spoiler the reply I don't mind :)
As from what I can gather online, the majority of positive reviews are generally just average reviews but the person has given the film a semi decent score at the end. It appears that many folks are overly praising the film, being overly generous and giving it a pass simply to combat, or get back at, or get revenge on the 'haters'. If you check many of the RT reviews you'll notice the average score is 6/10, just above average, yet its fresh.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ghostbusters-is-a-perfect-example-of-how-internet-ratings-are-broken/
Metacritic score of 61 out of 100, based on 41 critics.
Of the reviews aggregated by Metacritic, 24 were positive, 16 were mixed, 1 was negative.
Tomatometer score of 74 percent "fresh" based on 138 reviews.
Of those reviews, the average rating was 6.5 out of 10.
Looking only at top critics, it had a Tomatometer score of 54 percent "fresh" based on 35 reviews.I know this sounds like a conspiracy theory but the amount of reviews I've read with clearly biased/sexist wording...and these are from professional sites! Salon, NY Times and The Guardian reviews all show clear signs of biased wording. NY Times headline for their review is clear bait. I expect this from regular people, but not from professional sites and media sites. Clearly trying to boost the film for political reasons.
Also read on Facebook that some cinemas are giving out little Ghostbusters pins before you go into the film. So they're bribing cinema goers for positive reviews apparently lol!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NQjjgkyzZ0
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2016, 11:07:59 AM
Also read on Facebook that some cinemas are giving out little Ghostbusters pins before you go into the film. So they're bribing cinema goers for positive reviews apparently lol!
Cinemas have been giving out themed promo items for a long time.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jul 15, 2016, 11:13:42 AM
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 15, 2016, 11:07:59 AM
Also read on Facebook that some cinemas are giving out little Ghostbusters pins before you go into the film. So they're bribing cinema goers for positive reviews apparently lol!
Cinemas have been giving out themed promo items for a long time.
Yeah I know that, I haven't ever gotten anything free myself but I've heard about it. It just seems kinda suspicious lol! Before the film? like a gift to boost your mood hehe
As someone who has worked in a cinema, I can quite confidently say that that's nothing to be suspicious of and quite common.
Yea I have a whole stack of goodies for opening day movies. All I got for the GB opener was some lazy postcards that you take a selfie of for a chance to win reward points. Kind of lame. At least Jurassic world gave you a t-shirt.
I don't know man, this movie kind of beat me down. I wasn't going to see it but I figured it could probably be good. I was wrong, so very wrong. More wrong than Elizabeth Shaw could have ever been. The trailers showed the funny parts and my biggest problem with the movie was that it was mean. There were so many jerks and being an idiot isn't that funny. Someone getting fired isn't nice and no, the same joke over and over isn't funny either. The cameos were atrocious. Dan Aykroyd wouldn't drive to Chinatown... f**k me at that point. What the hell was I thinking that this movie could have been ok. The biggest problem is that I've seen enough movies to have seen the jokes many times over that it was an outright snore-fest.
@hubbs
Spoiler
After the credits start it cuts to weavers cameo and she just looks plain old. When I thought about her trying to reprise her bad ass aliens self... it just died for me right there. That's all I mean.
You know, what made Ghostbusters great was that the original movie played it serious. This movie plays out fully aware that it is a comedy... it knows that it is one big joke and gives you exactly that.
I didn't mind Jones but the movie treats her like shit for being the non-scientist. McCarthy is written as a jerk. The Wiig girl is cute but seems to only be there to ooggle over Hemsworth. And mckinnon is an ass but at least she has one long winded speech at the end that addresses that. Oh and I did mention that this movie's populated by assholes right? From the unfunny university presidents to the unfunny cameos of the former ghostbusters to the unfunny mayor/mayoral_assistant/fbi_guys/hemsworth_the_worthless™... the unfunny main bad guy. Maybe I'm just an old foggy but this movie sucked.
The editing also sucked hard, the movie doesn't make much sense and I just heard the original cut was over 4 hours long... and you know what, it f**king feels like it. BvS has nothing on this. I gotta be honest, I feel bad for the ladies, I feel bad for Hemsworth. None of them deserved this. Yea, even if they got paid for doing it.
Oh and one last thing: Bill Murry has no dick. Nor does the f**king ghost logo. Oh god I felt pain for Jones character when that punk drew the anti-ghost logo on the subway wall. WHY!
At my theater we're giving away mini flashlights for those that pay extra for the theater with better sound and leather seats.
I think everyone got your gist about 60 pages ago.
Had a day to think on it.
Yep, still enjoyed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCP937VRfI4https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m6F9g9Mu64
Quote from: Alienseseses on Jul 15, 2016, 05:23:16 PM
Had a day to think on it.
Yep, still enjoyed.
Had half a day to think about it... the movie is bad. The comedy just came off as being plain mean.
For anyone who has not seen this...
Spoiler
they kill ghosts with their proton lasso. Literally, in the context of the movie they kill ghosts. I mean what the f**k. No explanation is given aside form mckinnon mentioning her new proton pack as a side note. Oh and slimmer is nonsense, he and his chick and a few ghost buddies take ecto-1 on a joy ride for a few minutes and it ends all "die hard 2" like when Bruce willies ejects from the plane before it explodes. It was dumb.
oh and speaking of dumb, yea I know it is a movie but ecto-1 literally has 2 nuclear devices on it in he middle of new f**king york and yes they nuke the ghost hole.
What irritates me is how the director is trying to make himself out to be a big savior for women by making this film, when he turned it down three times prior, had Bill Murray sued to appear in the film, wrote it knowing fully well this was merely a product Sony was pushing, and helped drum up the whole SJW card to get butts into seats. Nevermind girls have been in the Ghostbusters franchise in the cartoons and comics, or that they have been popular halloween costumes that both sides get into. No. He's the little innocent victim and the big bad internet are out to stop women.
This kind of hubris not only sabotages any future projects he may work on, but shows he is far more petty and venomous than any "internet troll".
Did you see the Vae Victis video linked in here? He's a snivveling, simpering little cuckrat. Very cringy.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 17, 2016, 04:34:52 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHUbXtE_ui0
I find it quite disturbing that I agree with this character. It did feel like a sitcom production.
There are two reasons why this movie has gotten a bunch of decent reviews (by official sites).
1. Because some people are wanting to get back at the huge backlash it received, basically so they can point and say 'we were right and you were wrong'.
2. They are indeed pushing an agenda, and that agenda is helping women get equality in movies. This might make you roll your eyes but its true. If this movie fails then it will seriously harm the future of female driven movies, that's not a good thing, but it probably will because the bigwigs in Hollywood are idiots. Yes there will always be strong female characters, but the idea of having films like this, with females having the majority of the leading roles could well be affected if Ghostbusters doesn't do well. This is why many official sites are completely pushing this movie in the name of 'progression'. The fact that its full of sexism and racial stereotypes apparently goes unnoticed.
Example, right at the start of this official site article it says, 'THERE ARE AMPLE REASONS to go see Ghostbusters: supporting women'. That sums it all up frankly, that's all this is about.
http://www.wired.com/2016/07/kate-mckinnon-appreciation/
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 17, 2016, 01:12:09 PM
There are two reason why this movie has gotten a bunch of decent reviews (by official sites).
1. Because some people are wanting to get back at the huge backlash it received, basically so they can point and say 'we were right and you were wrong'.
2. They are indeed pushing an agenda, and that agenda is helping women get equality in movies. This might make you roll your eyes but its true. If this movie fails then it will seriously harm the future of female driven movies, that's not a good thing, but it probably will because the bigwigs in Hollywood are idiots. Yes there will always be strong female characters, but the idea of having films like this, with females having the majority of the leading roles could well be affected if Ghostbusters doesn't do well. This is why many official sites are completely pushing this movie in the name of 'progression'. The fact that its full of sexism and racial stereotypes apparently goes unnoticed.
Example, right at the start of this official site article it says, 'THERE ARE AMPLE REASONS to go see Ghostbusters: supporting women'. That sums it all up frankly, that's all this is about.
http://www.wired.com/2016/07/kate-mckinnon-appreciation/
I just hope hollywood stops rebooting great franchises.
I heard a rumor they want to make an all female remake of Blues Brothers.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 17, 2016, 09:01:15 PM
I heard a rumor they want to make an all female remake of Blues Brothers.
I never liked that movie so adding women could help.
Saw this at weekend. Didn't want to but because I've managed to avoid seeing a lot of the films the lady thought looked good and I didn't, I thought I'd take one for the team. It was ok. Middle ground, ok. Not terrible but nothing good either. I thought most of the jokes fell flat (some worked though). I didn't think the characters or actors had any chemistry going on.
McCarthy I'm not really a fan of. Wigg I do actually like but I didn't really buy her in this. I actually really enjoyed Bridesmaids and the smaller bit parts she'd had in various things, especially when she's playing it dry. Jones played far too stereotypical black woman in New York. Though she had a few moments I enjoyed - the ghost on her shoulders bit. McKinnon I loved and may actually be in love with. Easily the highlight for me and I really can't wait to see her in more.
Otherwise, eeehhhhhh. The bad guy...it was just like what's the point. However, Hemsworth being possessed was quite fun. You could tell he was enjoying it. Forgettable film for me.
I will be fair. Of the clips I've seen, I kind of liked the fight scene in (what I assume to be) Times Square. I don't know the context of it, but I assume they're throwing ghosts into each other because only they can touch each other? They used the beams like lassos and were spinning/tossing them into each other like bowling pins. That looked like something that a good Ghostbusters movie would probably have, just with better dialogue.
From what I can gather, the big difference between this and the originals is the brand of comedy. In the original, the characters were usually the butt of the joke, playing straight and reacting to things that were funny. Here... they're f**king cartoon characters. And not even good ones. A bunch of wacky, obnoxious c**ts who think conversations are just a series of easy jokes one after the other, and then the scene transitions to the next clean slate for jokes to be made. They're not the butt of the joke, they are the joke, and so propel themselves along through the film, but don't have the talent or writing to do it effectively.
That's just what I could gather from the sparing footage I've seen and the half dozen or so reviews I've watched. Even if this were a good sketch comedy film, it would still be a strange fit for the series, and it just shows they don't have any love or appreciation for the series. "Oh, we bought a comedy series to pull our untalented asses up onto? Well we better be funny then" Yeah, no, comedy is not one single thing. There are schools of comedy, and you would know that if you were actually funny.
Screw it, I'm going to watch the original Ghostbusters and replay the 2009 game. I'm curious now. Maybe I'll like it better this time around.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3ZnouzpI8IIts so amusing how official sites are trying to big up the films weekend performance. It pretty much failed on its opening weekend, couldn't even beat a week old movie, only managed 46 mill after predictions of 50+, and yet everyone is saying its still gonna be a hit lol!
What biased, agenda pushing world do we live in?? oh wait ::)
This...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sn_vAcFGTJU
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 15, 2016, 12:24:52 PM
At my theater we're giving away mini flashlights for those that pay extra for the theater with better sound and leather seats.
Are the flashlights given away so that it's easier for people who can't stand it anymore to walk out?
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 18, 2016, 03:43:57 PM
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 15, 2016, 12:24:52 PM
At my theater we're giving away mini flashlights for those that pay extra for the theater with better sound and leather seats.
Are the flashlights given away so that it's easier for people who can't stand it anymore to walk out?
Boom! Where's my mic dropping gif when I need it :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA
Not to beat a dead horse but yea it is bad. I'm truly trying to see where 73% of rotten tomato reviews are saying this was a fresh movie. This is pixels bad. It's pretty damn close to skyline bad. It's bad comedy.
Hmmm... might be a bit early, but I'm 20 minutes into the original Ghostbusters, and the acting seems a bit strange. It's not bad, just... eh, struggling to find the word for it. Disjointed? Help me out here.
Edit: Aaaand it's fine now. Weird. It's like a few scenes have less direction for the actors, but it seems much better once they get to the hotel.
Just got back from seeing it. I laughed a few times, it's very exuberant, and the effects are amazing. It's not great though - most particularly, it's just not funny enough. The original film wasn't exactly a hysterical laugh riot, but made up for it with creativity and atmosphere. Not a whole lot of that with this film, which is effective a straight re-tread. To get away with that, it needed to crank up the comedy, and there wasn't enough.
First thing I thought back when they did the reveal for new Ghostbusters wasn't "how dare they remake a classic" or "it's feminism gone maaaaad", it was misgivings about the talent involved. Paul Feig's writing is patchy at best, and Kristen Wiig seemed to be the only member of the cast with particular comedy chops. That's turned out to be a fully realised misgiving, as the script is by far the weakest element, and it feels like there was very little improv room even for Kristen, let alone the rest.
There's a post from me somewhere way back in this thread, and one I'd still repeat after seeing the film, that I really wish they'd involved some accomplished stand-ups on the script and cast. Sarah Silverman, Amy Schumer, Wanda Sykes, Kristen Schaal, Katherine Ryan, Chelsea Peretti, Tina Fey... their involvement isn't necessarily a seal of quality (no comedian has a 100% track record in cinema as far as I know), but at least guarantees a few extra gags thrown in during filming, or into the script if they're allowed treatment. There's nobody like that involved in the film as far as I know (aside from Kristen Wiig who has no script credit), and it really hurt the film. Teetering on whether it merits a 3/5.
Some points to remember:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WOUTAqRdtoMatt's been giving some fairly good analysis in regards to this.
I finished original. Was... okay. I laughed twice I think. Was tempted to stop at the party scene. That neighbor character was horrendous to sit through.
Saw this last night. It was very enjoyable. It works well as a straight comedy, but starts to lose it's way towards the end, when it just follows in the footsteps of the original. To be fair, redundancy is a plague in the world of modern franchise blockbusters, no matter the label given: remake, reboot, sequel, etc. Anyways, I'd give it a 7/10.
Here is what I thought in a spoiler-heavy review:
Rather than bring something new to the table to warrant it's own existence, the 2016 Ghostbusters lazily kicks over the table and points and laughs the mess. The characters have absolutely no energy and a complete lack of chemistry with one another. While the moments of non-dialogue were part of the humour in the original, in this movie when the 4 main cast stop their obvious improv lines and there is silence, it is deafening. Beats left in to allow the joke to work, or to give the audience a moment to process and laugh, feels really awkward, and you can just imagine hearing crickets while the cast beam silently, ecstatic with the misguided opinion that they are hilarious.
The mayor and the officials of New York act like the Sony execs. "No, don't go out there announcing yourself as the Ghostbusters, we have many sequels we want you to appear in. Let's stretch this out as humanly possible." so you don't get the rags to riches storyline. You don't get the montage of progression. They get quickly moved away in the aftermath so there is no glory. The interaction with their clients and fans was some of the best moments of the original, here the best we get is some copied and pasted comments from youtube referencing the politics behind the movie which I hated. And all of this missed opportunity is for nothing as soon enough there are ghosts everywhere, so the plotline of convincing the public the Ghostbusters were frauds was a huge waste of the movie's time.
There has been a lot of praise for Chris Hemsworth, but I was straight faced during every one of his witty lines of dialogue. He is an absolute moron, to the point where the fact he doesn't have a carer makes it improbable that he is still alive. But what makes the Ghostbusters collectively even more stupid is the fact that after Hemsworth displaying these moronic traits, they still go ahead an employ him. Much of his interview is devoted to his ideas for corporate identity (Both logos not used) as if somehow a good receptionist means being able to produce clip art.
The exposition is presented like a saturday morning cartoon. After catching and releasing one ghost, they manage to create a map of ley lines to find the source easily enough. Rowan does his usual 'I will rule all!" monologues but you never really understand his motives, but worse, you don't care. You just know it's integral to the overall plot, and if it means sitting through tedious villain plot points to get some actual ghostbusting, you endure it.
They seem to have a never ending source of funds to produce ghostbusters equipment, and somehow zapping a physical bin or bike without going near a ghost is a legitimate way to test them. Ghost traps are a way of containing them, but even the movie forgets that after it's first use, and it is now possible to shoot them until they explode, or just shred them.
Everything just sort of limps along as if powered by the original movie's energy but never garners enough to actually put it into it's own movie. The cameos are lazy and every reference to the 1984 film is less subtle than having the dvd of the original repeatedly smacked across your face.
The product placement is consistent to the point of sickening. Don't be deluded that by supporting this film, you are supporting equal rights and equality in Hollywood. You are supporting Sony, Pringles, Papa Johns, H&M and Walmart. There are better written, wittier and smarter female leads in film out there much more deserving of your admiration, and given the forum I'm sure you can think of a few.
The ending makes no sense. Why does Rowan get these superpowers? If he has never been popular and suddenly he is in the body of Chris Hemsworth, who was appealing to women despite having the brain of a mouse, why doesn't he just continue his life in that vessel? Why does Rowan give them the choice of his form, then ignore them? Why do all the people freeze like they are about to start a dance number and not do anything, but appear in the credits doing a full dance routine? Did this actually happen? Why does Rowan turn into the cartoon Ghostbusters logo and the red circle a bow tie? Why do ghosts attack the Ghostbusters one by one? Are they on Rowans side or just of their own free will? How are the Ghostbusters such amazing shots and acrobats with only one ghost catching experience in which they were completely incompetent? Why do they not need contained anymore? Why does Slimer steal the car and then drive back again? Why does a nuke turn a portal into a huge ghost trap? Why does Kirsten Wigg and Melissa McCarthy's hair turn white? Why are there parade balloons? - are they relics of the past controlled by ghosts, or are they actually ghosts? Why then do they pop like balloons when jabbed with a Swiss Army Knife™? Why does Rowan not chase the Ghostbusters (the main threat) when he transforms but instead decide to mindlessly smash up buildings? But most annoyingly, why is it that when the portal closes up that everything returns to normal? All the buildings are intact, and the people frozen in dance moves were definitely killed during the building collapse. They are alive again? But a firetruck is still on it's side? There is no consequence to death or destruction unless a portal is open?
It's not funny so fails as a comedy. It's not original so fails as a premise. There is nothing new here so it fails as a reboot. It mimics much of the beats of the original, but to a much lesser quality so fails as a remake. It is instantly forgettable and the story flatlines so it fails as a movie.
I understand that the media has had a field day covering the production of this movie, labelling every naysayer as a misogynist, so they can't very well turn around and say that those naysayers were right and that this is a terrible movie, but I am really disappointed in several publications and their kindness in critiquing this film. At no point did it feel a quality film put together with love or pride. At no point did it feel like an entertaining comedy. The scariest bit was the end promising of a sequel. I can only hope that with time, when the dust has settled behind Ghostbustersgate, people will see this movie for what it is; Cheap, lazy, forgettable and worst of all, unjustified by it's own existence. The effects already look dated, the greenscreen sets in the finale disjoin you as a viewer from all reality to the point of not caring. The characters just spend time in each others company without really feeling like friends or a team, and the best thing for this movie to do is to fade into obscurity so just like when people say "Have you seen Psycho?" you know they are asking about the original.
5/10 as a generic dumb Adam Sandler action comedy from the studio that brought you Pixels.
3/10 as a Ghostbusters movie
And Spidey, shrugging your shoulders and saying "Eh? Hollywood is fvckd anyway. We can't expect better - 7/10" is indicative of the mindset that allows for the corporate wheels to keep churning. I heavily advise anyone not to put your money towards seeing this manufactured bs. Not even for the sake of this movie, it's out now, it was greenlit and exists. I'm talking about the studio mentality that taking a beloved name and slapping it on a cg turd makes money. It needs to be stopped. Deadpool is proof that when someone gets it right, the studios notice. They will notice when something goes wrong too, and that godforsaken day when I go on Youtube to find a Back to the Future remake starring Zac Efron might still never happen.
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jul 20, 2016, 08:26:01 PM
Saw this last night. It was very enjoyable. It works well as a straight comedy, but starts to lose it's way towards the end, when it just follows in the footsteps of the original. To be fair, redundancy is a plague in the world of modern franchise blockbusters, no matter the label given: remake, reboot, sequel, etc. Anyways, I'd give it a 7/10.
This is the problem with a lot of the corporations - the decision makers fear the failure from new ideas. So they stick to old ideas.
Quote from: Shinawi on Jul 22, 2016, 04:16:53 PM
This is the problem with a lot of the corporations - the decision makers fear the failure from new ideas. So they stick to old ideas.
From everything I've read, the final product's tone is very much in line with what was written for the pitch Feig made in that leaked E-mail, with very few departures. Even the dance number was apparently filmed and is apparently going to be placed in the extended version.
Quote from: Hubbs on Jul 17, 2016, 01:12:09 PM
There are two reasons why this movie has gotten a bunch of decent reviews (by official sites).
1. Because some people are wanting to get back at the huge backlash it received, basically so they can point and say 'we were right and you were wrong'.
2. They are indeed pushing an agenda, and that agenda is helping women get equality in movies. This might make you roll your eyes but its true. If this movie fails then it will seriously harm the future of female driven movies, that's not a good thing, but it probably will because the bigwigs in Hollywood are idiots. Yes there will always be strong female characters, but the idea of having films like this, with females having the majority of the leading roles could well be affected if Ghostbusters doesn't do well. This is why many official sites are completely pushing this movie in the name of 'progression'. The fact that its full of sexism and racial stereotypes apparently goes unnoticed.
Example, right at the start of this official site article it says, 'THERE ARE AMPLE REASONS to go see Ghostbusters: supporting women'. That sums it all up frankly, that's all this is about.
http://www.wired.com/2016/07/kate-mckinnon-appreciation/
3. there are people that like Paul fieg movies?
I never seen one of this films but i get the impression that all his films are like what this GB turned out to be.
So there could be people that dont care about the the real Ghostbusters but have seen Bridermaids and whatever else and are fine with what this movie ended up being.
Quote from: Bughunter S. Thomson on Jul 22, 2016, 03:02:57 PM
And Spidey, shrugging your shoulders and saying "Eh? Hollywood is fvckd anyway. We can't expect better - 7/10" is indicative of the mindset that allows for the corporate wheels to keep churning.
I never said those words. And I honestly found the film to be enjoyable. It was funny. I thought so anyways, & I'm not the only one. What are your thoughts on Jurassic World, or Force Awakens? Those are 2 of the more successful & well seemingly well liked examples of what I was referring to when I cited Hollywood's redundancy issue. Both films are near remakes of well liked stories masquerading as sequels. Sure, I found both enjoyable, but I wouldn't heap praise on either. I'm still amazed at the number of people that outright loved Force Awakens. That's the whole point though, isn't it? We liked it the first time, so we'll like it again. It doesn't always work. People were seemingly pissed when Hangover 2 used the exact same plot from Hangover 1. As for Ghostbusters, I even said in my brief write-up that I felt it floundered in the backhalf when it committed itself to following in the footsteps of the original.
It does seem like there's a slow backlash building over Force Awakens. Felt like I was the only person with anything bad to say about it at the time, but I've been hearing more and more of it online over the last few weeks.
Well I just got back from seeing it, better than first, but not as good as the second.
I only liked Bridesmaids really. Spy was okay-ish but not that great. Ghostbusters: The Remake, if what Red Letter Media has to say rings true (and I usually trust them)it's not worth the time and effort.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 24, 2016, 11:08:28 PM
Well I just got back from seeing it, better than first, but not as good as the second.
??? :( :o
Quote from: Vertigo on Jul 24, 2016, 09:58:01 PM
It does seem like there's a slow backlash building over Force Awakens. Felt like I was the only person with anything bad to say about it at the time, but I've been hearing more and more of it online over the last few weeks.
Funny as someone who likes TFA, since release i havent seen any forum or talk back online that wasnt hating on the film.
The movie has been out for two weeks and has yet to make back its production money. If that isn't a testament to it being bad I don't know what is.
Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jul 29, 2016, 02:03:51 PM
The movie has been out for two weeks and has yet to make back its production money. If that isn't a testament to it being bad I don't know what is.
Not according to Sony. Making a huge loss is a 'triumph' and a 'huge success' apparently. The GEU is beginning! Or it might just go the way of the failed Spiderman GEU hopefully.
On a similar note, how similar was the showdown in Amazing Spiderman 2 and Ghostbusters? Times Square is a great excuse for product placement. I bet they reused assets from AS2 too, the cheap sods.
With all the ridiculous tax write offs and incentives handed down on a silver platter to the film industry, Sony isn't going to lose a dime with this turd. The movie is a dud but some how avoided being a bomb.
Still this movie is terrible.... I mean I'm a person that likes to come to terms with opposing view points but it's been a while since I was so bored that I wanted to get up and leave. Hell I think that was the general sentiment of the crowd, except for some reason it was so dark that no one could see the exit. When the credits ended and the lights came on, we were defeated and I felt bad for the few people that liked the movie. It was like Tom Brady deflated the air from the theater.
Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jul 29, 2016, 02:03:51 PM
The movie has been out for two weeks and has yet to make back its production money. If that isn't a testament to it being bad I don't know what is.
Yes, b/c popularity always translates to quality ::)
I have no idea how this will go down, but here goes. I just watched the Half in the Bag review, and they brought up a really good point. Of all the films out there to revamp in this way, Ghostbusters is kind of a strange choice. You're feminizing something that was never particularly masculine. So I got to thinking...
...how would you guys feel about a GIRL POWER Predator movie?
Here me out! Don't kill me yet. Who would it take to direct and act and what would the story have to be to have you believe it could be a good Predator movie? I'm gravitating towards some of the comic plots. An all female prison being hunted by a Predator, or something set in Russia could be cool.
Quote from: Sabby on Jul 30, 2016, 09:46:54 PM
I have no idea how this will go down, but here goes. I just watched the Half in the Bag review, and they brought up a really good point. Of all the films out there to revamp in this way, Ghostbusters is kind of a strange choice. You're feminizing something that was never particularly masculine. So I got to thinking...
...how would you guys feel about a GIRL POWER Predator movie?
Here me out! Don't kill me yet. Who would it take to direct and act and what would the story have to be to have you believe it could be a good Predator movie? I'm gravitating towards some of the comic plots. An all female prison being hunted by a Predator, or something set in Russia could be cool.
Your suggestions sound quite interesting.
Also take into consideration that being male or female means sod all when you fight an alien Predator hell bent on claiming your skull.
If he can kick Arnie's huge muscular ass in hand to hand, he can surely kick any man or woman's ass.
So ladies and gentlemen have to rely more on wits, much like Dutch, to outsmart a monster from another world.
Exactly why I went there. Predator has such a male flavor to it, but nothing about it needs to be masculine. It's a perfect candidate to get the feminist reboot tribute. They don't always have to be garbage. We don't always have to end up with Ghostbusters. Maybe we can get an Alien or Aliens now and then.
Now that I think of it, that prison comic might make a good TV series. Follow an agent trying to infiltrate a prison and unite the gangs against the Predator.
It would be very heavy handed and come off as an insecure plea from feminists.
Quote from: genocyber on Jul 30, 2016, 10:53:28 PM
It would be very heavy handed and come off as an insecure plea from feminists.
Likely, but I think it could work if handled right.
In my opinion I have to ask why?
Why hitchhike off the name and success of a existing franchise when you could make you're own? don't just remake a already existing movie with Females in the role make a new movie with it's own original characters and storyline and one that will not have it's merits compared against the original.
Just remaking a old movie with a new gender just reeks of laziness and unoriginality.
And it's just plain lazy.
Quote from: g2vd on Jul 30, 2016, 11:08:24 PM
In my opinion I have to ask why?
Why hitchhike off the name and success of a existing franchise when you could make you're own?
Don't worry, I agree with ya. I would prefer people make the content they want to see. But they're not doing that, and so long as they're pushing themselves into other properties, why not try and do it good?
At the end of the day, I'd prefer original content, but they're going to reboot shit regardless, we could at least push for those properties to well handled.
Predator 2 showed they won't hurt a pregnant woman, so sending a team of expectant mothers-to-be after one wouldn't be a bad idea... 😉
>taking Red Letter Media seriously
You guys should know better than to treat the Lucas haters as taste makers.
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 31, 2016, 12:13:57 AM
>taking Red Letter Media seriously
You guys should know better than to treat the Lucas haters as taste makers.
I will say Lucas has a truly visionary mind I mean he created the Star Wars mythos and others and is truly one of the best visionary filmmakers ever seen he just stinks so, so bad at directing now.
If he has someone to hold him back than he's arguably the biggest boon you can get for a Scifi Film production you just have to hold him back.
Quote from: Sabby on Jul 30, 2016, 11:27:03 PM
Quote from: g2vd on Jul 30, 2016, 11:08:24 PM
In my opinion I have to ask why?
Why hitchhike off the name and success of a existing franchise when you could make you're own?
Don't worry, I agree with ya. I would prefer people make the content they want to see. But they're not doing that, and so long as they're pushing themselves into other properties, why not try and do it good?
At the end of the day, I'd prefer original content, but they're going to reboot shit regardless, we could at least push for those properties to well handled.
I see what you're saying. My problem with an all female reboot of Predator, is it would be an all female reboot of Predator. Hear me out before anybody labels me sexist. The problem I'd have with it, is the reasoning. Let's do an all female reboot because 'Girl Power'. It's where Ghostbusters went wrong. I've got no problem with female Ghostbusters, I've got no problem with female characters battling a Predator, what I have got a problem with, is 'all' female because 'politics'. You're already creating a problem with fans with a reboot, you're then dividing fans with political agendas, whilst dragging in others who for the most part, weren't fans of the original in the first place. You bring out the feminazi's, you bring out the real sexist pigs, and the rest of us caught in the middle, get dragged into a maelstrom of bullshit, labelled sexist or anti woman for voicing your gripes with the reboot overall. Now, if you wanted a reboot, and add female characters, who are interesting, who have depth, then hell yeah sign me up, but give me a good movie. Ghsotbusters didn't do that, if Feig had spent more time going over his story, instead of his 'f**k the haters' attitude, 'girls are better than boys' mentality, we might have gotten something watchable.
Take Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, or Buffy. Three of the most iconic characters in Sci Fi/Horror. Why, because of how they were written. Feminine, yet strong, fragile yet badass. And not badass because they were 'strong independent women' stereotypes, badass because they had to be. Ripley was forced to battle the Alien because she was the last, then because the soldiers failed, then because her 'daughter' Newt was taken from her, then in Alien 3, because she had to save humanity. The same with Sarah Connor, she had a future thrown at her that she didn't want, she cried, she screamed, she was afraid, but she came out strong, because she had to. Move along to Terminator 2 and she is stronger, prepared, ready to fight, but still holds that frailty she had before she met Kyle Reese. (Her breakdown after trying to kill Dyson) And Buffy, the blonde from so many horror movies getting chased by the monster, became the one doing the chasing after finding out she was the next Slayer. Again, because she had to, not because 'Girl Power'. All three characters were strong, iconic, role models, because they were well written, well performed and grounded. I didn't see any of that in ghostbusters. I saw nerdy one, crazy one, loud one and awkward one. And I don't think another all female reboot would be much different.
Boy that was long. I'm sure a few will disagree, by all means, I'm giving my opinion, not a truth
No, I get it, part of why I suggested the Race War comic (I think that's what it was called, at least). There's a good context for the characters involved to be mostly female. It's still an attempt to make a female empowerment film, but it's not nearly as blatant and transparent as Ghostbusters.
Maybe the prison is super corrupt and tied to some criminal organization, which is what draws the Predator. It's after the people in charge, and the inmates are overlooked for the most part, but are what ultimately shiv the Predator in a gas chamber and then slam the door shut.
Again, not saying this is a good idea through and through, I just like to think of something could be done good, rather than just go 'this is bad never do it again'. I don't think that's productive.
All I'm trying to say is these reboots are not entirely devoid of potential, and so long as they keep happening there's value in perfecting them.
The problem with reboots, is they think homages, and subtle nods to the original mean respecting the original. But you can have all the nods and homages you want, if you have a shitty script, fans will hate it
Quote from: g2vd on Jul 31, 2016, 12:22:08 AM
Quote from: Twin Drive Sigma Aquarion on Jul 31, 2016, 12:13:57 AM
>taking Red Letter Media seriously
You guys should know better than to treat the Lucas haters as taste makers.
I will say Lucas has a truly visionary mind I mean he created the Star Wars mythos and others and is truly one of the best visionary filmmakers ever seen he just stinks so, so bad at directing now.
If he has someone to hold him back than he's arguably the biggest boon you can get for a Scifi Film production you just have to hold him back.
George Lucas is not a visionary, he's a capitalist. Everything good about the original films were from other peoples input, or them polishing his own ideas to be better. Did you not notice the prequels were all about banking clans and political games, the thing a guy like him finds more interesting than simple good vs evil stories.
Quote from: g2vd on Jul 31, 2016, 12:22:08 AM
I will say Lucas has a truly visionary mind I mean he created the Star Wars mythos and others and is truly one of the best visionary filmmakers ever seen he just stinks so, so bad at directing now.
Every good idea Lucas ever had was given to him by someone else, and implemented by someone else. Alone, he's not much of an artist or creative. I've always admired other directors who are artists, designers, etc, but Lucas really sold his own legend and obscured many of his collaborators so he could be seen as the sole Father of Star Wars.
Quote from: Valaquen on Jul 31, 2016, 11:20:29 AM
Quote from: g2vd on Jul 31, 2016, 12:22:08 AM
I will say Lucas has a truly visionary mind I mean he created the Star Wars mythos and others and is truly one of the best visionary filmmakers ever seen he just stinks so, so bad at directing now.
Every good idea Lucas ever had was given to him by someone else, and implemented by someone else. Alone, he's not much of an artist or creative. I've always admired other directors who are artists, designers, etc, but Lucas really sold his own legend and obscured many of his collaborators so he could be seen as the sole Father of Star Wars.
The guy fought Hollywood and won and still gets shit for it. I understand where you're coming from but the really important idea was most likely his.
Lucas created the Star Wars sandbox. I've oft thought he gets too much flak from fans. True, the prequel trilogy is massively disappointing, but even so. Also, I'll take Revenge Of The Sith over Force Awakens any day. Force Awakens is a perfect example of a sequel/reboot that borrows way too much from it's original. It's also what doomed Predators, which tried so desperately to emulate Predator instead of forging it's own path. And more interesting than a Predator facing off against an all female cast, would be to maintain a predominately male cast, & feature a female predator.
The fact he gave the fans the middle finger when they complained about him altering the things they loved about the original movies and the prequels not being as well made shows how much of a man child he really is. Also the fact that he sold the rights to Disney and then called them white slavers makes him a real ungrateful piece of shit.
There's definitely someone ungrateful in the conversation, but I'm not sure it's Lucas.
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Jul 31, 2016, 12:47:43 AM
I see what you're saying. My problem with an all female reboot of Predator, is it would be an all female reboot of Predator. Hear me out before anybody labels me sexist. The problem I'd have with it, is the reasoning. Let's do an all female reboot because 'Girl Power'. It's where Ghostbusters went wrong. I've got no problem with female Ghostbusters, I've got no problem with female characters battling a Predator, what I have got a problem with, is 'all' female because 'politics'. You're already creating a problem with fans with a reboot, you're then dividing fans with political agendas, whilst dragging in others who for the most part, weren't fans of the original in the first place. You bring out the feminazi's, you bring out the real sexist pigs, and the rest of us caught in the middle, get dragged into a maelstrom of bullshit, labelled sexist or anti woman for voicing your gripes with the reboot overall. Now, if you wanted a reboot, and add female characters, who are interesting, who have depth, then hell yeah sign me up, but give me a good movie. Ghsotbusters didn't do that, if Feig had spent more time going over his story, instead of his 'f**k the haters' attitude, 'girls are better than boys' mentality, we might have gotten something watchable.
Take Ellen Ripley, Sarah Connor, or Buffy. Three of the most iconic characters in Sci Fi/Horror. Why, because of how they were written. Feminine, yet strong, fragile yet badass. And not badass because they were 'strong independent women' stereotypes, badass because they had to be. Ripley was forced to battle the Alien because she was the last, then because the soldiers failed, then because her 'daughter' Newt was taken from her, then in Alien 3, because she had to save humanity. The same with Sarah Connor, she had a future thrown at her that she didn't want, she cried, she screamed, she was afraid, but she came out strong, because she had to. Move along to Terminator 2 and she is stronger, prepared, ready to fight, but still holds that frailty she had before she met Kyle Reese. (Her breakdown after trying to kill Dyson) And Buffy, the blonde from so many horror movies getting chased by the monster, became the one doing the chasing after finding out she was the next Slayer. Again, because she had to, not because 'Girl Power'. All three characters were strong, iconic, role models, because they were well written, well performed and grounded. I didn't see any of that in ghostbusters. I saw nerdy one, crazy one, loud one and awkward one. And I don't think another all female reboot would be much different.
Perfectly said, I think. On all counts.
Ghostbusters officially flops in the UK.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/intl/uk/yearly/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hqfi8zBxh4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWROBiX1eScThis is actually pretty interesting. It's very hard to argue with numbers.
There is always a minority of idiots who will post that kind of shit. But it was a minority. Paul Feig and the cast have themselves to blame for their arrogance, and gender baiting appearances, for driving away potential audiences
But muh narrative!
I fail to see how they actively drove away audiences. And it may have been a minority, but they sure were vocal. Quality of the film aside, there is absolutely no reason 4 women can't be ghostbusters.
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
I fail to see how they actively drove away audiences. And it may have been a minority, but they sure were vocal. Quality of the film aside, there is absolutely no reason 4 women can't be ghostbusters.
Hey, when you create a smear campaign against half the population, you respond.
Quote from: Sabby on Aug 03, 2016, 08:10:28 PM
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
I fail to see how they actively drove away audiences. And it may have been a minority, but they sure were vocal. Quality of the film aside, there is absolutely no reason 4 women can't be ghostbusters.
Hey, when you create a smear campaign against half the population, you respond.
Exactly. And I don't have a problem with female Ghostbusters. I have a problem with 'why' we had female Ghostbusters. Openly generalising nerd culture, people who didn't like the trailer because it looked terrible under the label 'sexist' is going to drive people away. And it did. And now the movie has flopped
Quote from: Sabby on Aug 03, 2016, 08:10:28 PM
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
I fail to see how they actively drove away audiences. And it may have been a minority, but they sure were vocal. Quality of the film aside, there is absolutely no reason 4 women can't be ghostbusters.
Hey, when you create a smear campaign against half the population, you respond.
I was referring to the campaign against the movie, actually. Anything in response I felt was warranted. I don't think they labeled anyone simply disinterested in the film as sexists. A vast majority of people seemingly felt the need to chime in how stupid the notion of female ghostbusters was/is, & that is sexist.
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: Sabby on Aug 03, 2016, 08:10:28 PM
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:02:26 PM
I fail to see how they actively drove away audiences. And it may have been a minority, but they sure were vocal. Quality of the film aside, there is absolutely no reason 4 women can't be ghostbusters.
Hey, when you create a smear campaign against half the population, you respond.
I was referring to the campaign against the movie, actually. Anything in response I felt was warranted. I don't think they labeled anyone simply disinterested in the film as sexists. A vast majority of people seemingly felt the need to chime in how stupid the notion of female ghostbusters was/is, & that is sexist.
They didn't need to, because they characterized the movies critics as primarily sexist racist man children. As the video said, 0.8% of people who saw the trailer commented inappropriately, and those comments were curated. You're wrong and these people are scumf**ks.
They attacked nerd culture as a whole, and not only Paul Feig, Judd Appatow, and Dan Akroyd. There are scenes in the movie, that blatantly attack 'nerds', every male character in the movie was an idiot, a nerd or a villain. Feig should have put more effort into the actual story, than his little 'boys drool' moments, which is essentially what this nonsense was from the start
And to go back to my issues with 'why' female ghostbusters.
I would be equally unhappy if somebody rebooted Alien, or Terminator with male Ripley/Connor characters simply because 'men are awesome'
Its dumb, it's cheap, and you sacrifice good story telling for politics
How overdramatic. Seriously, it attacked nerd culture? :laugh:
0.8% of people who viewed the original trailer posted negative comments about female Ghostbusters, but apparently 'man babies' are responsible for the negative reception.
Yeah, I'm being overdramatic by pointing out the film makers generalising comments
Quote from: Novak 1334 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:46:46 PM
0.8% of people who viewed the original trailer posted negative comments about female Ghostbusters, but apparently 'man babies' are responsible for the negative reception.
Yeah, I'm being overdramatic by pointing out the film makers generalising comments
+11
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Aug 03, 2016, 08:44:24 PM
How overdramatic. Seriously, it attacked nerd culture? :laugh:
They did, yes, to obfuscate and dismiss valid criticism. And it worked, obviously.
Paul Fieg is a troubled little man with daddy issues. This movie was his way of getting back at the lack of a male role model in his life.
It's just a bad movie IMO. Bad in it's design, bad in it's purpose and bad in it's final product. If people like it, awesome. But I stand by what I said earlier in this thread. Paul Feig is a hack
I saw this the other day and, you know, I didn't hate it. Went in with pretty low expectations and because a friend insisted we see it. Is it a perfect film? No. A few of the characters and many of the jokes fell flat. But Kate McKinnon and Chris Hemsworth nailed it and there were plenty of laughs between the two of them. The rest of the cast were not horrible, but didn't deliver in the same way. The ghosts and the special effects looked pretty neat for most parts. The villain was a bit weak, though I did enjoy certain aspects of him. Likewise, the action and the ending was a bit hit and miss. Overall a decent film and I'm glad I actually got to see it on the big screen.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ghostbusters-heading-70m-loss-sequel-918515
Word of mouth really hurt the movie despite having 72% on RT.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Aug 10, 2016, 05:10:26 PM
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ghostbusters-heading-70m-loss-sequel-918515
Ouch. I know I'm bashing Paul Feig a lot, but his attitude, along with a lot of people involved is a huge factor, and the marketing team
Good. If ever a movie deserved to fail, it's this soulless, shameless garbage...
This will hit Feig badly in the long run...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSqvSCUaK60
But he did that behind the scenes thing where he dressed as a clown and prostrated himself in front of womyn. How did that not result in a funny science fiction adventure?
Quote from: Sabby on Aug 11, 2016, 07:02:07 AM
But he did that behind the scenes thing where he dressed as a clown and prostrated himself in front of womyn. How did that not result in a funny science fiction adventure?
Judging by his scriptwriting, he might be right. Men AREN'T funny
Other remakes like Total Recall, Evil Dead and Robocop did poorly. Maybe Hollywood can stop remaking classic movies.
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Aug 11, 2016, 09:28:31 PM
Evil Dead.
Really? I thought the Evil Dead movie was received well and got quite a bit of money.
It could have done better. I remember like two years ago, Jane Levy said that there's not going to be any sequels anytime soon. Now we have Ash vs. Evil Dead which is what fans wanted.
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Aug 11, 2016, 09:28:31 PM
Other remakes like Total Recall, Evil Dead and Robocop did poorly. Maybe Hollywood can stop remaking classic movies.
I actually liked all three of those remakes (never watched the theatrical version of '
Total Recall', but the extended edition seemed fairly entertaining). The moment I read the pitch for this one, however, it just seemed impossible to do in a way which was respectful, let alone entertainment-worthy.
Then all the rest of the stuff leaked out... Pascal back-stabbing Reitman, threats to sue Murray into compliance and so on. There was just had a nasty vibe written all over it. It would have at least been something if they hadn't doubled down and tried to shift blame of all its problems onto the sexist narrative, but they did it in such a ridiculous way they essentially mocked themselves.
One could only hope now that the studio regards it as such a waste of time they'll simply hand off development of the alleged TV spin-off to a creative team and lets them get on with it, devoid of any interference, only to have an unexpectedly decent product on their hands as a result.
https://vimeo.com/180110425
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/770733152218341376
Watched this last night, had to turn off before the end, truly awful. I laughed once at one of Hemsworths jokes. By far the worst thing in the whole movie was Kate McKinnon, irritating just doesnt cover how cringeworthy and irritating this character was. She spends most scenes goofing about and twitching in the background, even the other actresses seemed bothered by her. AVOID
One can only hope the failure of this film has sent a message to Sony and all other companies to keep their greedy hands off beloved classic franchises.
God this was terrible... is the extended cut any better?
Quote from: genocyber on Sep 23, 2016, 11:07:47 PM
One can only hope the failure of this film has sent a message to Sony and all other companies to keep their greedy hands off beloved classic franchises.
I don't even think that's the problem. If they had made the right choice and made it a sequel/passing of the torch film it could have been good. The movie has two big failures 1) its a a remake/reboot and 2) its unfunny and just dog shit in general. I'm surprised at how unfunny this film really is, it just felt lifeless. I liked some of the ghosts though, the subway electric-dude was pretty cool. Crap villain as well.
f**k up of the year by far.
Quote from: whiterabbit on Sep 27, 2016, 12:07:01 PM
f**k up of the year by far.
Every facet of this films production and marketing was horrendous
Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016)
Ghost Corps huh, opening credits and straight away the first sign of a planned, multi-movie franchise...they never learn. Anyway, who ya gonna call? certainly not these guys! (quick pause for my readers sides to stop splitting). Oh shit wait, I meant gals! Oh Christ now I've done it. No but seriously, who are you gonna call here? a better script writer perhaps? better cast, better effects, another director, hell just a completely different movie to this. But how bad could this really be? I ain't afraid of no gaudy, garish, neon, clearly all CGI ghosts...actually I am, shocked and horrified at just how scarily bad they actually were.
Right so things start off in much the same way the classic 84 movie did. We are given a brief little vignette that sets up the basis of the plot (its about ghosts) that will eventually lead to greater things. When I say the same as the 84 original, I meant literally, the opening scene is done in the exact same way complete with the legendary Ray Parker Jr theme tune accompanying the films main title card/shot. Now at this point I was actually on-board for the ride believe it or not, the intro sequence was actually pretty creepy. It looked quite good, it intrigued me, a nice tone of light-hearted horror, and when Ray Parker Jr's tune kicked in I actually felt a nostalgic lump in my throat, as if I'd just been zapped back to my childhood. That's as far as it goes though because apparently the supernatural incident we see has no consequences or follow up whatsoever. The curator bloke of this old 19th century stately home seems to get attacked? killed? possessed? Unsure, but after seemingly being doomed he just pops up later, completely fine, and that story arc is never followed up for the rest of movie.
Its from this point onwards, when we meet the new characters, that virtually everything spirals out of control in an impressive fiery fireball of failure. You have the chubby McCarthy who I guess plays the Ray Stantz type character because she has the same love, enthusiasm and dedication to science and the supernatural that Ray had...plus body shape. Wiig who's the more straight-laced, apprehensive character which could be Venkman? But without the smug, dry humour. McKinnon I'm guessing is a live action female version of the cartoon Egon Spengler from The Real Ghostbusters. Same technical mind but here she's basically loopy. Lastly Jones presumably would be the Zeddmore type character because she's the streetwise, blue-collar, token black character. Admittedly the female characters are more of there own thing here, there is a hint of the classic quartet of course but generally they're relatively unique, which is good.
The main story revolves around one human villain called Rowan, a mad scientist and occultist who wishes to open a portal to the ghost world to bring about the apocalypse. In order to do this he is placing these strange devices along spiritual ley lines in New York City in order to charge them up and create a vortex. At the exact point where these ancient ley lines cross or meet, Rowan has a much larger device that when activated along with the charged up ley lines, will rip a hole into the spirit world. Oh and its where he conveniently works too. Sounds reasonable doesn't it, and it is accept for the fact that nothing is really explained. Rowan is basically a bit nuts right, OK that's fine, but why does he want to do this? Just because he's nuts? Well no, apparently its because he's a bit of a loser, an outcast with no friends and he's depressed...and that's the reason. Secondly, what are these devices he's placing along the ley lines? How does he make them? How does he know how to charge the ley lines? How did he make such a huge single device? How does he fund all this? And of course, how does he manage to get away with making a whopping big device in the basement of the hotel where he works? Then as the plot progresses we discover that Rowan plans to kill himself in order to lead a ghost army when the apocalypse starts. But, but...how the hell does he intend to carry that out?! Why would he be able to come back as a ghost? Does he have some kind of special gift or powers? Why would ghosts follow this guy?? How does he manage to not only come back as a ghost, but a seriously powerful ghost just like Gozer the Gozerian?
Around this main premise you have all the standard fare which you basically got in the original. The ladies create their own equipment and develop it over the course of the film, naturally all the gear is strewn with various flashing LED's because that apparently makes it look cooler. They manage to pick up an old hearse to use for transportation which they call 'Ecto 1' because of course they do. They get themselves natty ghost catching uniforms which make them look like garbage collectors (seriously under designed, was that the best production could come up with? Grey jumpsuits with orange go-faster stripes?), and they trap ghosts. When I say trap ghosts I mean one, one single entity with a huge f**k off ghost trap that looks like a torpedo. The film is called Ghostbusters but we only see them trap one ghost, they also have nowhere to store the ghost once caught. This leads me to the finale of the movie where the ladies have developed their equipment so much, they are now able to kill ghosts? I seriously have no idea what happens here, the proton packs sort of lasso the ghosts and enable them to be dragged along the floor...for what reason? The girls are tossing ghosts around, throwing them into each other, sucking them into a ghost chipper type thing, punching them (yes) and generally blowing them up somehow. So is this universe you can effectively kill a ghost of reduce it to ectoplasm (I'm guessing they would call it that seeing as they ripped-off everything else) by punching it and sucking it into a chipper type machine. I won't even go into the awful slow motion action sequence where Holtzmann does some kind of John Woo/Neo shit with two pistol sized particle throwers.
Whilst all this slapstick action is going off the effects offer us a mixed result, two sides of a coin for sure. Whilst the general look of the movie is naturally very glossy, colourful and slick, it can't help but look like a cartoon. There are numerous shots that have been blatantly copied from the 84 classic but it still can't detract from the fact the film looks childish overall. This also goes for the general tone of the flick too, it really doesn't know what the hell its going for, light-hearted kids comedy, edgy horror comedy, mainstream comedy, Feig comedy etc...The equipment looks just like I expected it to, plastic and obviously fake, no amount of flashing LED's can change that, but luckily they have kept the iconic particle thrower beam close to what we all know and love. Yes I realise that's me being hypocritical as I've complained about them ripping-off other things from the 84 original, but this was one thing that needed to remain, anything else simply wouldn't do. As for the CGI...well it doesn't help matters at all, that's not to say its bad, it just doesn't fit this franchise. As many have already said, the CGI looks ridiculous and much like some other movies such as 'Haunted Mansion' and the Scooby-Doo flicks. The large green dragon/demon ghost in the concert sequence actually looked like something from The Real Ghostbusters. Its virtually all bright neon effects making almost every scene with ghosts look like the interior of a nightclub, why would ghosts be so bright and colourful? This also doesn't help the actors who are clearly standing in front of greenscreens. My only positive is Rowan in logo form who does look pretty good and made me wonder how sweet a modern Mr Stay Puft would look these days. Other than that the 84 original effects still blow this out of the water.
The deciding factor in this movies downfall is quite frankly the fact its hideously unfunny. End of the day its a comedy, but it sucks. The ladies try their best to come across as amusing and its just embarrassing to watch, cringeworthy at the best of times. The performances are muted and bland at best, McCarthy is simply McCarthy yet again, Wiig is dull as dishwater and clearly not really enjoying herself, and I've no f**king clue what McKinnon thought she was doing because it wasn't funny in the slightest. Oh but she was so quirky, off the wall and unique...yeah...no she wasn't, she looked unique but acted like a fool. Lastly we have the mighty walking controversy that is Jones. Amazingly best of the quartet and easily the most relatable and believable, who'd of thought it huh. Although, still have no idea why her character would quit her stable, dependable job on the subway to join a risky venture in ghost catching. That seemed totally unrealistic to me, no one would do that without some form of plan or guarantee. In the original Zeddmore needed a job so he took what he could get, that made sense, not this. So that's the four ladies, anything else? oh yes, Chris Hemsworth, the hypocritical, highly ironic, reverse sexist character that somehow evaded Feig's all out politically correct, all accepting agenda. Or did it? was this a deliberate move by Feig? along with the reshot scenes of meta references to the internet rage and fanboys, and the casual man-bashing we see liberally sprinkled throughout. Well I think its pretty obvious now from what you can read and watch online but that aside, this character was annoyingly shit and an insult to the franchise.
Oh yeah, way WAY too many needless, pointless cameos. Did the movie need a cameo from Ozzy Osbourne? or any of the original cast? They could of at least not made them so bloody blatant, it gave the movie a Zoolander-esque vibe at times for Christ's sake. What was the point of crowbarring in a cameo from Sigourney Weaver in the end credits?? Come to think of it, what was the point of the Slimer cameo other than gratuitous pandering to the fanboys to try and get them into cinemas. But they couldn't even do that right, horrific CGI aside, they gave the spook a female partner! (basically Slimer with lipstick and a wig). What the literal f**k?! Its things like this that truly make you wonder what's going on behind the scenes, who the hell thought that would be a good idea?
So is this movie passable and enjoyable as some professional critics dubiously wrote? Well sort of...if you completely put aside all the Ghostbusters franchise aspect of it and look at it as a completely independent movie. In that case then yes, you could say its reasonably entertaining, or maybe as a live action adaptation of the cartoon at best, but only in those cases. Is the movie as bad as some have made it out to be? Yes I'm afraid it is...as a reboot of such a legendary, iconic franchise as Ghostbusters, yes it is that bad, shamefully bad. The humour is seriously lacking with terrible dialog, there's no real tension anywhere, no real threats, you never worry about the characters safety, you don't really care about the characters, and the entire finale was a huge anti-climax. The film just didn't engage me in any way, everything was simply mundane, no excitement, no thrills, nothing. At one point I did wonder why the film didn't look 'New Yorkish' to me, turns out they filmed in Boston for Pete's sake! I mean seriously, if you can't even do the location justice, how can you expect to do the film justice. This in turn leads to a world that isn't believable because it consists of sets, greenscreen sets and locations that aren't New York.
Basically this doesn't really feel like a proper supernatural comedy or fantasy movie. It feels much more like a parody of the genres, and a poor parody at that. The whole thing is subpar, at times shockingly shallow, limited and chock full of tropes, cliches and stereotypes. Whilst at the same time merrily showing complete contempt for the main target demographic, the (dare I say male) fanbase. After all those years, all the speculation and talk, what a completely wasted opportunity which unfortunately looks to have put the kibosh on the future of the franchise.
2.5/10
I wish every reboot and remake fails and dies quickly. Ghost corps lol. Already planning a franchise are we? Maybe they should have planned their funeral. I was dragged to this movie by a young girl who had never seen the original Ghostbusters fully knowing I'd at least get some needed sleep. The only thing that kept me awake was Thor's humor and having to explain to her who or why members of the original cast kept creeping in...can't wait for the next reboot death. Please go extra harsh on these Hubbs, lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUuMZwH6FJ8&t=1s
damn, RIP!!!!
https://twitter.com/TheInSneider/status/877657499238670336
http://www.thewrap.com/henry-j-deutschendorf-ii-baby-oscar-from-ghostbusters-ii-dies-of-suicide/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHUV8QLpEAc&index=45&list=WL
I wanted to like this movie but it felt soulless and didn't respect the source material to make it feel like a worthy sequel. The last straw for me was the lame cameos for the old crew, not even relevant or linked to their personas from the previous films.
Quote from: Cellien on Aug 19, 2017, 05:04:36 PM
I wanted to like this movie but it felt soulless and didn't respect the source material to make it feel like a worthy sequel. The last straw for me was the lame cameos for the old crew, not even relevant or linked to their personas from the previous films.
They looked like hostages on the Tonight Show.
Exactly.
I didn't notice Bil Murray's cameo until 5 minutes after he went flying out the window and Dan Aykroyd's cameo was painful.
Guess he just assume Ernie Hudson needs a pay check. I think this boat has sailed with the death of Ramis but I wouldn't say no to a Ghostbusters 3.
Let it go Dan. Let. It. Go. Harold is gone and it just would not be the same without Spengler.
They should do another game instead. I still love replaying the game. If they get Maurice LaMarche to voice Spengler, it would work.
The thing that pissed me off about the 2016 movie was that it totally would have worked as a parallel universe to the original. Literally all they needed was a throwaway line about parallel universes and it would have been an expanded universe. Rowan becoming a Destroyer and following the same rules as Gozer and his minions (has to be given a physical form, can possess people like Zuul and Clortho, etc.) would have totally made sense. Instead they pedantically insisted that it was all alone in continuity, and it just came off as a forced rehash (a Cadillac... again... a firehouse... again...) Sooo much potential was squandered.
If the rest of the cast was returning, and the story somehow honored Egon and Harold Ramis, I would be okay with it.
Though, I wonder how I would feel if they brought Egon back with CG and old unused footage, having him die early on and pass over to the spirit world to still help the team.
I dont know, it could be a great tribute, or might ultimately just end up feeling too wrong.
Hey folks I know the solution. Egon had an estranged daughter who inherited his Proton Pack and the ghost are back; so there's only one thing Dan can do, get the gang back together and hunt some ghosts. So yea, basically the Ghostbusters now have a chick on the team and keep that creep Venkman away from her.
The first people they kill are the characters from the 2016 movie so that the old crew have some ghost to hunt.
https://twitter.com/JasonReitman/status/1085341662283350016
Here we go again. hmm I wonder what Jai Courtney is up too.
Alright. I'm cautiously optimistic. Here's hoping Bill, Dan and Ernie sign on.
Quote from: ace3g on Jan 16, 2019, 04:19:29 PM
Already a brief teaser
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV2XKE6G9yI
And just like that, I'm in.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xT8qBtz6Cd1qA9myS4/giphy.gif)
I want to believe in that, i really do...but i will force myself to wait till i get excited this time.
Jason Reitman has made some pretty great films. This will be his first blockbuster but I'm hoping he can round up a great team and cast to make this movie great. I didn't mind the remake but I thought it was a huge mistake to ignore the first two movies. The cameos from the original cast were all really bad.
Quote from: MudButt on Jan 16, 2019, 05:05:05 PM
Jason Reitman has made some pretty great films. This will be his first blockbuster but I'm hoping he can round up a great team and cast to make this movie great. I didn't mind the remake but I thought it was a huge mistake to ignore the first two movies. The cameos from the original cast were all really bad.
+1 Plus a majority of Feig's movies were R rated comedies - Big transition doing a PG13 comedy.
So its a sequel to the original 2 and not the newest one?
Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jan 18, 2019, 06:01:23 PM
So its a sequel to the original 2 and not the newest one?
Yep!
I am cautiously optimistic.
Anyone seen Leslie Jones' comments on this. What a dumbass she really is...
Some just don't get the point and stick with their gibberish.
Quote from: Rankles75 on Jan 21, 2019, 02:05:43 AM
Anyone seen Leslie Jones' comments on this. What a dumbass she really is...
You're gonna get flogged for that comment. ;D
Why? He is telling the truth.
Quote from: Master on Jan 21, 2019, 03:51:52 PM
Why? He is telling the truth.
Certain people don't like it. :D
https://youtu.be/iYJR0Manxwg (https://youtu.be/iYJR0Manxwg)
I don't always like every word he says, but he does properly make fun of the idiotic posts of the
afflicted party.
She wrongly assumes the movie will be about 4 men when reports and surfaced that the plan is too have the new team be comprised of 2 boys and 2 girls in their teenage years.
"I made such beautiful crap and you have the audacity not to like it's smell! You are all so misogynistic, you should be ashamed of yourselves!"
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 18, 2019, 06:05:23 PM
Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jan 18, 2019, 06:01:23 PM
So its a sequel to the original 2 and not the newest one?
Yep!
I have just one question.
Are the flowers still standing?
Quote from: Huggs on Jan 22, 2019, 12:16:56 AM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 18, 2019, 06:05:23 PM
Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jan 18, 2019, 06:01:23 PM
So its a sequel to the original 2 and not the newest one?
Yep!
I have just one question.
Are the flowers still standing?
(https://i.imgur.com/ABkJ42F.gif?noredirect)
I has another confession:
Spoiler
I haven't seen Ghostbusters 2.
Repent for the end is nigh!
Go ahead watch it. It's pure fun!
Quote from: Master on Jan 21, 2019, 10:02:30 PM
"I made such beautiful crap and you have the audacity not to like it's smell! You are all so misogynistic, you should be ashamed of yourselves!"
The excuse any time a movie bombs.
True
Quote from: Master on Jan 25, 2019, 07:37:50 AM
True
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FyHMZO6k.jpg&hash=234126ca6c52250acfde436044c75f9f2dcef9fc)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/01/21/box-office-ghostbusters-leslie-jones-star-wars-halloween-jurassic-world-batman-v-superman/
https://twitter.com/TheWrap/status/1088980701603540993
I've never seen this BTS photo before.
https://twitter.com/RealEOC/status/1092523316978565120
Pretty cool!
https://twitter.com/IGN/status/1101626196465463297
Quote from: ace3g on Mar 02, 2019, 12:56:59 AM
https://twitter.com/IGN/status/1101626196465463297
I could see that working
https://twitter.com/Ernie_Hudson/status/1110702032858566656
https://twitter.com/JasonReitman/status/1111744073117757441
What a great cast! All three of them are fantastic.
https://twitter.com/EW/status/1114212052820733952
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1116812226029998080
Sigourney is coming back to Ghostbusters!
"She's also set to reunite with Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd in the new Ghostbusters, due July 2020. "It's going to be crazy working with the guys again!" she says. She won't reveal any details except to confirm she's reprising her role as hauntee Dana Barrett."
https://parade.com/888940/maramovies/sigourney-weaver-career-highlights/
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/a2/ff/9ca2ff3bfd8e0e26b09d7b58d3baf107.jpg)
Quote from: molasar on Jun 07, 2019, 09:32:11 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/a2/ff/9ca2ff3bfd8e0e26b09d7b58d3baf107.jpg)
Yep. Considering all the things her character went through in regards to the supernatural, that would definitely be a logical result!
Quote from: molasar on Jun 07, 2019, 09:32:11 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/a2/ff/9ca2ff3bfd8e0e26b09d7b58d3baf107.jpg)
Could've used that on the nostromo.
https://twitter.com/OnlyFilmMedia/status/1137334953786716160
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/ghostbusters-julia-roberts-sigourney-weaver-marshmallow-man-140000978.html
'Ghostbusters' at 35: Ivan Reitman on casting Sigourney Weaver over Julia Roberts, the frightening challenge of Marshmallow Man and more
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 08, 2019, 02:41:44 AM
Quote from: molasar on Jun 07, 2019, 09:32:11 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/a2/ff/9ca2ff3bfd8e0e26b09d7b58d3baf107.jpg)
Could've used that on the nostromo.
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbc57zWRoQ1rhq7xgo1_r1_500.jpg)
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1137518143398481925
Quote from: molasar on Jun 08, 2019, 02:27:42 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 08, 2019, 02:41:44 AM
Quote from: molasar on Jun 07, 2019, 09:32:11 PM
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9c/a2/ff/9ca2ff3bfd8e0e26b09d7b58d3baf107.jpg)
Could've used that on the nostromo.
https://66.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbc57zWRoQ1rhq7xgo1_r1_500.jpg
Ha! I knew that!
https://twitter.com/yvrshoots/status/1139312631439745024
https://twitter.com/OnlyFilmMedia/status/1140136387959762945
That is awesome! All we need is Rick Moranis and the whole entire cast is back! Except for Harold Ramis of course RIP.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jun 19, 2019, 02:11:01 AM
That is awesome! All we need is Rick Moranis and the whole entire cast is back! Except for Harold Ramis of course RIP.
f**king yes! I can't wait for a proper sequel to the real Ghostbusters. 8)
Paul Rudd Joins 'Ghostbusters 2020' (EXCLUSIVE)
https://variety.com/2019/film/news/paul-rudd-jason-reitmans-ghostbusters-1203236578/
Awesome. :)
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1144274190910066688
Quote from: Shasvre on Jun 27, 2019, 09:25:27 PM
Paul Rudd Joins 'Ghostbusters 2020' (EXCLUSIVE)
https://variety.com/2019/film/news/paul-rudd-jason-reitmans-ghostbusters-1203236578/
Awesome. :)
Ghostbusters: Hindsight. I dig it. :D
https://twitter.com/krolljvar/status/1148311930144079872
https://twitter.com/JasonReitman/status/1149837684891881473
https://twitter.com/cathdoll1/status/1156790175789285376
The guy in the Orange vest is totally owning that moment.
Paul Rudd? How did I miss that one? Awesome.
I hope the little kid isn't a principle cast member or a ghosbuster. Too 90s lol.
https://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/1158754670896189440
https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1158285046760923138
Quote from: ace3g on Aug 06, 2019, 11:29:20 PM
https://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/1158754670896189440
https://twitter.com/TMZ/status/1158285046760923138
(https://giffiles.alphacoders.com/104/104396.gif)
I'm optimistic about this.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B1E-sTzpQ3H/?utm_source=ig_embed
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1174729872243138560
Quote from: ace3g on Sep 19, 2019, 11:51:10 PM
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1174729872243138560
Got my tickets!
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1185326477430050816
So glad Mr. Murray decided to finally join.
Quote from: The IndependentAykroyd confirmed the news on The Greg Hill Show, adding: "Jason Reitman wrote a beautiful, heartfelt script that takes the real DNA from the first two movies and transfers that directly to the third, the next generation. It hands the legacy off to a new generation of stars, and players, and actors, and characters."
https://twitter.com/Independent/status/1193092613093629957
Quote from: Immortan Jonesy on Nov 11, 2019, 02:50:29 AM
Quote from: The IndependentAykroyd confirmed the news on The Greg Hill Show, adding: "Jason Reitman wrote a beautiful, heartfelt script that takes the real DNA from the first two movies and transfers that directly to the third, the next generation. It hands the legacy off to a new generation of stars, and players, and actors, and characters."
https://twitter.com/Independent/status/1193092613093629957
That secret restaurant pic gave it away a month or two ago but it's nice to hear an official confirmation for Bill Murray.
Really looking forward to a teaser trailer on this. It has to be soon!
The reported title is...
Ghostbusters: Afterlifehttps://comicbook.com/movies/2019/11/11/ghostbusters-2020-title-reportedly-revealed-ghostbusters-afterlife/
https://twitter.com/VanityFair/status/1202996379892813824
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1203011220493754368
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4a2HFWPhow (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4a2HFWPhow)
enjoy 8)
Where's the OG?
Starring James Cameron, as The Guy With The Shovel.
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
Looks like they did, as far as I'm concerned.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Dec 09, 2019, 06:05:31 PM
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AntiqueBossyGossamerwingedbutterfly-small.gif)
Quote from: Local Trouble on Dec 09, 2019, 06:05:31 PM
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
Honestly, that movie was pretty funny.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Dec 09, 2019, 06:05:31 PM
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
For the same reason you don't hit yourself in the face with a shovel? :D
So far I'm optimistic after this trailer.
I am starting to wonder though if all the original Ghostbusters are now ghosts.
Quote from: Shasvre on Dec 09, 2019, 07:31:04 PM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Dec 09, 2019, 06:05:31 PM
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
Honestly, that movie was pretty funny.
I thought both Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy were hilarious in Bridesmaids, so it was do disappointing to find them unfunny in Ghostbusters 2016, so much so I didn't even finish watching it. :-\
Quote from: Shasvre on Dec 09, 2019, 07:31:04 PM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Dec 09, 2019, 06:05:31 PM
Why didn't they just make a sequel to Ghostbusters (2016)?
Honestly, that movie was pretty funny.
Was it as good as Charlie's Angels?
There were a few acorns in the last one. I don't see why there was such an uproar over it, though it was probably something to do with all the "woke" business. They did the best they could with what they had.
From the trailer it looks good as a film, but stylistically nothing like the original two.
The 80s = almost 40 years ago
40 years before the release of the original Ghostbusters = WWII
Even my parents were born after WWII. When I was a kid, I already thought of them as grumpy old people who often argued against each other. Now I'm approaching what their age used to be when the film was released!
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/12/31/USAT/3c0620d7-c32b-43ff-87b9-bc32c51ee0cf-Ghostbusters_Afterlife.jpg)
Love it!
Quote from: ace3g on Jan 03, 2020, 09:45:08 PM
(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2019/12/31/USAT/3c0620d7-c32b-43ff-87b9-bc32c51ee0cf-Ghostbusters_Afterlife.jpg)
Fun trivia fact: the file size of that image is almost ten times that of the original
Doom game.
Quote from: Bloody Disgusting"There's a lot of practical effects," Wolfhard raved about Afterlife. "And a lot of the effects that you think would be CGI are not, which I was so happy to be part of."
https://twitter.com/BDisgusting/status/1219285179623256065
Until they paint it all over with CGI in post :D
That's a safe bet mate. :laugh:
https://twitter.com/TheInSneider/status/1244786321417056257
Ghostbusters 3 moved from July 10th... a few months away... to March 5th 2021. Man, the magnitude of this...
We can't seem to catch a break :(
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Mar 31, 2020, 02:29:42 AM
Ghostbusters 3 moved from July 10th... a few months away... to March 5th 2021. Man, the magnitude of this...
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/5886eaec57b0790a3ca3a81bcf237da1/tenor.gif?itemid=13540328)
Exactly. :(
https://twitter.com/slashfilm/status/1252696391622615041
Looks like we will be getting new trailer/TV spots soon. They were recently classified
Title Ratings Date Running time Distributor
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (Fathom Cutdown) Parental Guidance May 29, 2020 3:38 Sony Pictures Releasing
Ghostbusters: Afterlife (Pass the Proton Pack trailer) General May 29, 2020 3:03 Sony Pictures Releasing
If true, strange we're getting a second trailer now considering the movie was moved to 2021.
Unless, perhaps their bumping up the date?
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jun 03, 2020, 12:10:07 PM
If true, strange we're getting a second trailer now considering the movie was moved to 2021.
Unless, perhaps their bumping up the date?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/gHTX2ZC4IuDgQ/giphy.gif)
Looks like the trailers were classified for Ghostbusters Day which has been cancelled.
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1268626978099191808
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/eIPM3j6YXHKXC/giphy.gif?cid=6c09b9524068c5d9899a78c9419337e89b46eb8f0e511825&rid=giphy.gif)
https://twitter.com/joshgad/status/1268674518731485184
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JtOHr4IJHQ&t=5s
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1276545759966408707
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1278460311817736192
No footage just quotes
https://twitter.com/ComicBook/status/1282099854425100288
https://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/1280194813044948993
https://twitter.com/io9/status/1285968387622010881
Hadn't seen this before
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqpumEZmxa0https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f99ZEV96wU
https://twitter.com/VancityReynolds/status/1303687095492505600
I don't remember this either, lol
https://twitter.com/GarrGilchrist/status/1303617482784038912
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPdA3NBt_EUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQt9qDxOjOA
https://twitter.com/ComicBook/status/1309925449162723329
Quote from: ace3g on Sep 26, 2020, 07:22:39 PM
https://twitter.com/ComicBook/status/1309925449162723329
yeah but does it transform into a robot?
I can't believe there's so many films in the can (including this one) just collecting dust.
2020....
https://twitter.com/colliderfrosty/status/1312062696360038400
Quote from: ace3g on Oct 02, 2020, 04:14:01 PM
2020....
https://twitter.com/colliderfrosty/status/1312062696360038400
That has been happening a lot in New York lately, unfortunately.
Quotejasonreitman
Verified
A journey that started 3 years ago or maybe 35 years ago is complete.
Can't wait to see GB:A in a theater up on the big screen with an even bigger bag of popcorn. I've been catching up on all kinds of classics at home, but what I miss is sitting with an audience of friends and strangers and feeling that collective rush as we laugh together or jump out of our seats. And yes... I miss trailers too!
Right now, much braver people than me are doing the hard work so we can all return to our lives. Please support their sacrifice. Please stay safe. Wear a mask for you and your community. Remember that Ghostbusters believe in science!
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1351171318205575172
Yeah, sure - he cried 'cause he was "proud"
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/f0/f6/8c/f0f68c982bb022a9083b68da6fa85b0c.gif)
:laugh:
That is great! I think I just got more enjoyment out of that clip than my whole viewing of Ghostbusters 2016!
Hope there's an in-story reason for Mini-Pufts, and it's not just been shoehorned in for nostalgia's sake.
Blue Velvet. :laugh:
Quote from: Rankles75 on Apr 07, 2021, 07:33:22 PM
Hope there's an in-story reason for Mini-Pufts, and it's not just been shoehorned in for nostalgia's sake.
I wouldn't count on it, personally
Quote from: Rankles75 on Apr 07, 2021, 07:33:22 PM
Hope there's an in-story reason for Mini-Pufts, and it's not just been shoehorned in for nostalgia's sake.
I don't think it needs to be. Stay Puft is a fictional brand and a staple of the Ghostbusters franchise and this kind of equates to a Baby Yoda to me in a way, where it doesn't feel driven by nostalgia, like it did in Ghostbusters 2016 for instance.
Also it is kind of hilariously macabre how they are melting each other with smiles on their faces. And I do love how that scream in an empty supermarket sets up that clip. It sets an eerie tone, something that the first film hit on quite well and I feel is a key ingredient. :)
As opposed to the 1982 SNL sketch.
Ghostbusters deserves a good sequel, I am really hoping for a win with this one. Honestly, I haven't liked any of them since the original.
Not even the second one ? I thought Viggo was cool.
Quote from: Trash Queen on Apr 09, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
TW: Spoiler
(https://media.tenor.com/images/78e81757e90dc6044c4c307af556fc64/tenor.gif)
Quote from: AliceApocalypse on Apr 09, 2021, 11:54:43 AM
Ghostbusters deserves a good sequel, I am really hoping for a win with this one. Honestly, I haven't liked any of them since the original.
I absolutely 100% agree with you. Here's hoping Afterlife is worthy as the original. 🤞
It's admittedly my own (arguably awful) taste when it comes to comedy.
Spoiler
I can't stand Groundhog Day either.
Quote from: Trash Queen on Apr 09, 2021, 01:12:08 PM
It's admittedly my own (arguably awful) taste when it comes to comedy. Spoiler
I can't stand Groundhog Day either.
(https://media2.giphy.com/media/SXrX5jIGoeZxhDMHLf/giphy.gif)
Quote from: AliceApocalypse on Apr 09, 2021, 11:54:43 AM
Ghostbusters deserves a good sequel, I am really hoping for a win with this one. Honestly, I haven't liked any of them since the original.
Wait, what? I thought they're on pair with one another .
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on Apr 09, 2021, 11:58:09 AM
Not even the second one ? I thought Viggo was cool.
Yeah, exactly!
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Apr 09, 2021, 12:23:46 PM
Quote from: Trash Queen on Apr 09, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
TW: Spoiler
https://media.tenor.com/images/78e81757e90dc6044c4c307af556fc64/tenor.gif
Quote from: AliceApocalypse on Apr 09, 2021, 11:54:43 AM
Ghostbusters deserves a good sequel, I am really hoping for a win with this one. Honestly, I haven't liked any of them since the original.
I absolutely 100% agree with you. Here's hoping Afterlife is worthy as the original. 🤞
(https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/76653172/anakin-youre-breaking-my-heart.jpg)
Quote from: Master on Apr 09, 2021, 08:38:19 PM
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on Apr 09, 2021, 11:58:09 AM
Not even the second one ? I thought Viggo was cool.
Yeah, exactly!
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/xTiIzFsPSoBqnEm4sU/giphy.gif)
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Apr 10, 2021, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: Master on Apr 09, 2021, 08:38:19 PM
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on Apr 09, 2021, 11:58:09 AM
Not even the second one ? I thought Viggo was cool.
Yeah, exactly!
https://media1.giphy.com/media/xTiIzFsPSoBqnEm4sU/giphy.gif
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/51/0d/1c/510d1cc3fffdf45258807875cdb0ebd0.png)
:P ;)
Marketing should start back up again with a June release date
https://twitter.com/JasonReitman/status/1382107233111068673
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1391422712665489410
Quote from: Master on Apr 10, 2021, 05:59:06 PM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Apr 10, 2021, 11:33:40 AM
Quote from: Master on Apr 09, 2021, 08:38:19 PM
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on Apr 09, 2021, 11:58:09 AM
Not even the second one ? I thought Viggo was cool.
Yeah, exactly!
https://media1.giphy.com/media/xTiIzFsPSoBqnEm4sU/giphy.gif
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/51/0d/1c/510d1cc3fffdf45258807875cdb0ebd0.png
:P ;)
(https://th.bing.com/th/id/R68c7b00f128599bd55cb15d2e3f27c1f?rik=uJESTcwo9z1XBw&pid=ImgRaw)
What have I missed?
Hopefully we are getting a new trailer or TV spot on June 8th
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1399757640268345345
Quote from: ace3g on Jun 01, 2021, 06:24:14 PM
Hopefully we are getting a new trailer or TV spot on June 8th
That's probably a good bet!
https://twitter.com/IGN/status/1402375391650541570
https://twitter.com/IGN/status/1402381472581910528
New Featurette
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDPJCnTSUJc
Image from GB Facebook page
(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/211968247_4131000173620619_5572875701571405054_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=3N4RPYF8XPEAX8EluHS&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=b263b717a7b036195b37212723e41eb4&oe=60ECACBE)
New trailer tomorrow
https://twitter.com/JasonReitman/status/1419691693117362180
Noice! Can't wait!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR-WxNVLZhQ&ab_channel=Ghostbusters
God damn! I need this movie! I need it to be good!
But in the end I do have two perfect Ghostbusters movies to enjoy for the rest of my life ;)
Please be good.
First reactions! Take with a grain of salt. :laugh:
https://twitter.com/ScottDMenzel/status/1430017499857264643
https://twitter.com/_LaurenHuff/status/1430039132785451008
A grain of salt indeed.
Not that I think this can't be good - I feel it has a good chance to impress - but it seems (at least to me) if a critic has a bad impression they tend not to go public with it / share it on social media and invite the oh-so-polite attention they're bound to receive. So we only hear of the good ones. :laugh:
New posters
https://twitter.com/IGN/status/1440722846162980872
I'll be checking it out!
(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/244751723_4813202688698504_4246383632398313864_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=M2tUCY3XLOQAX8R1eK6&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=30aaf33d8acb1155ee92fcbd49a6e674&oe=616895BC)
Quote from: ace3g on Oct 10, 2021, 09:07:59 PM
(https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/244751723_4813202688698504_4246383632398313864_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=M2tUCY3XLOQAX8R1eK6&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=30aaf33d8acb1155ee92fcbd49a6e674&oe=616895BC)
That's touching.
It's been overall positive so far with reviews... sitting at 84% on Rotten Tomatoes. The studio must believe in this film a lot to let critics screen and review it a month prior to release.
New poster
(https://i.imgur.com/MyYWbv3.jpeg)
I'm so looking forward to this!!!
Quote from: iain on Oct 20, 2021, 04:00:16 PM
I'm so looking forward to this!!!
Me too!!! Extremely!
So, I'm back from screening (big IMAX one!), and here are my few cents
Spoiler
First of all I must say I'm very impressed with actress who played Phoebe (Mckeena Grace) as she really hooked me into the films action. All other cast is also good the Phoebe's mother probably being the weakest link. What bothers me though is the thing that many recent sequels/ remakes of older movies do, and what makes them redundant in process, namely copying main plot points. The setting is different the setup is different but once again we are fighting Goser Goserian ( who this time is dark ruler of earth not the destroyer, as it should be). Star Wars VII did the same thing. In the end we are attacking yet another bigger Deathstar. Seriously the movie would have been so much better if we did get new demon overlord and more of actual ghostbusting. Shame and another wasted opportunity.
Cool BTS photos from original 2 movies
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/11/ghostbusters-family-photos?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_social-type=owned&utm_brand=vf&mbid=social_facebook&fbclid=IwAR1yYISnGEa8Zerh-BCHRYwNt71MtRi_8BY3xljDzgczBAdJla3uQJtmlp0
I actually really enjoyed the movie, flaws and all.
Spoiler
I just wish they would have come up with new bad guys instead of just rehashing Gozer and the dogs. But I will say, those last ten minutes with crew back together and Egon's ghost helping out were just perfect.
Spoiler
It's not that I didn't liked it. Point is It's wasted potential and medicore movie, when it could have been great. Scenes with mother and teacher possessed look like caricature of original movie. Also why so few nods to GBII?/spoiler]
Quote from: Master on Nov 20, 2021, 06:23:31 AM
Spoiler
It's not that I didn't liked it. Point is It's wasted potential and medicore movie, when it could have been great. Scenes with mother and teacher possessed look like caricature of original movie. Also why so few nods to GBII?/spoiler]
Spoiler
Even the people who haven't watched original movie know about this:
(https://wikiimg.tojsiabtv.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/98/Stay-Puft_Marshmallow_Man_in_Ghostbusters_(1984).jpg/1280px-Stay-Puft_Marshmallow_Man_in_Ghostbusters_(1984).jpg)
How many people remember this ?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6e/a7/87/6ea787f2bc0b26f1ac96651a4e8321f5.jpg)
See my point ? You can also compare both critical and audience RT scores for two movies. I know RT is not the most objective of aggregators but it's somewhat telling
Quote from: Kradan on Nov 20, 2021, 07:11:13 AM
Quote from: Master on Nov 20, 2021, 06:23:31 AM
Spoiler
It's not that I didn't liked it. Point is It's wasted potential and medicore movie, when it could have been great. Scenes with mother and teacher possessed look like caricature of original movie. Also why so few nods to GBII?/spoiler]
Spoiler
Even the people who haven't watched original movie know about this:
(https://wikiimg.tojsiabtv.com/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/98/Stay-Puft_Marshmallow_Man_in_Ghostbusters_(1984).jpg/1280px-Stay-Puft_Marshmallow_Man_in_Ghostbusters_(1984).jpg)
How many people remember this ?
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/6e/a7/87/6ea787f2bc0b26f1ac96651a4e8321f5.jpg)
See my point ? You can also compare both critical and audience RT scores for two movies. I know RT is not the most objective of aggregators but it's somewhat telling
Spoiler
I love both of those movies but I see your point. Thing is, it's sequel to existing franchise and should be treated as franchise.
I loved it, really loved it.
I didn't read any reviews until afterwards and many of them are quite scathing, yet even though I'd actually agree with some of their points of criticism it still didn't stop me loving it for what it was. Entertaining, funny, and a lot more moving than I thought it would be. First time I've shed a tear in a cinema in years!
Yeah, in parts it does right, it hits hard and heavy. Had tears in my eyes too.
Some BTS photos
Spoiler
https://www.instagram.com/p/CWg5AghvvlP/
I enjoyed it. If the 3rd act was more fresh it would have been a lot better. I think it was worth a trip to the theater.
I really liked that the nostalgia was mostly muted. It was there, but it wasn't overwhelming. It's just a pretty good kind of 80s Spielbergian family type adventure.
I really, really enjoyed the whole movie. I love how it starts, even how it ended and whom they faced... because if you recall the last time around, they only closed the door on its face.
Quote from: razeak on Nov 22, 2021, 03:20:27 AM
I enjoyed it. If the 3rd act was more fresh it would have been a lot better. I think it was worth a trip to the theater.
I really liked that the nostalgia was mostly muted. It was there, but it wasn't overwhelming. It's just a pretty good kind of 80s Spielbergian family type adventure.
Very well said, my thoughts exactly.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 22, 2021, 01:48:21 PM
I really, really enjoyed the whole movie. I love how it starts, even how it ended and whom they faced... because if you recall the last time around, they only closed the door on its face.
Spoiler
You've got a point Sir, yet I'd much rather face brand new villain. Also whole summoning of the Goser was rushed and abit sill (mother and teacher, gah...)and , you know, Goser was the Destroyer not ruler. Vigo on the other had was supposed to be dark messiah, ruler type.
In the end I hope will get another and soon, with all fresh set up and plot. Old-timers are as always more then welcome!
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 02:13:20 PM
Spoiler
You've got a point Sir, yet I'd much rather face brand new villain. Also whole summoning of the Goser was rushed and abit sill (mother and teacher, gah...)and , you know, Goser was the Destroyer not ruler. Vigo on the other had was supposed to be dark messiah, ruler type.
Spoiler
Well, the only way you can open the gateway for Gozer is through Vinz & Zuul / Keymaster & Gatekeeper, so it made sense to see that occur again to bring Gozer the Traveller back to Earth.
Personally I find some of the criticisms with Afterlife very odd, and mirroring my actual complaint with "Ghostbusters 2". To me Ghostbusters 2, while changing names and faces of the antagonists, repeats the same narrative structure too closely of the first movie and results is a poorer imitation... much like "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" does to A New Hope.
"Ghostbusters: Afterlife" actually feels like a bona-fide
sequel to Ghostbusters (1984)... where I'm not surprised nor disappointed to see threads continued.
https://youtu.be/nMtrjNPcjR0 (https://youtu.be/nMtrjNPcjR0)
You should visit the US just to hang out with RLM.
But I liked prequels. And Batman v Superman. They would probably kick my ass in a drunken fight
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 22, 2021, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 02:13:20 PM
Spoiler
You've got a point Sir, yet I'd much rather face brand new villain. Also whole summoning of the Goser was rushed and abit sill (mother and teacher, gah...)and , you know, Goser was the Destroyer not ruler. Vigo on the other had was supposed to be dark messiah, ruler type.
Spoiler
Well, the only way you can open the gateway for Gozer is through Vinz & Zuul / Keymaster & Gatekeeper, so it made sense to see that occur again to bring Gozer the Traveller back to Earth.
Personally I find some of the criticisms with Afterlife very odd, and mirroring my actual complaint with "Ghostbusters 2". To me Ghostbusters 2, while changing names and faces of the antagonists, repeats the same narrative structure too closely of the first movie and results is a poorer imitation... much like "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" does to A New Hope.
"Ghostbusters: Afterlife" actually feels like a bona-fide sequel to Ghostbusters (1984)... where I'm not surprised nor disappointed to see threads continued.
Sequels regularly does that. See Aliens, Predator 2 and Terminator 2. I agree Afterlife feels allot like Force Awakens.
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 05:43:17 PM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 22, 2021, 02:43:50 PM
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 02:13:20 PM
Spoiler
You've got a point Sir, yet I'd much rather face brand new villain. Also whole summoning of the Goser was rushed and abit sill (mother and teacher, gah...)and , you know, Goser was the Destroyer not ruler. Vigo on the other had was supposed to be dark messiah, ruler type.
Spoiler
Well, the only way you can open the gateway for Gozer is through Vinz & Zuul / Keymaster & Gatekeeper, so it made sense to see that occur again to bring Gozer the Traveller back to Earth.
Personally I find some of the criticisms with Afterlife very odd, and mirroring my actual complaint with "Ghostbusters 2". To me Ghostbusters 2, while changing names and faces of the antagonists, repeats the same narrative structure too closely of the first movie and results is a poorer imitation... much like "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" does to A New Hope.
"Ghostbusters: Afterlife" actually feels like a bona-fide sequel to Ghostbusters (1984)... where I'm not surprised nor disappointed to see threads continued.
Sequels regularly does that. See Aliens, Predator 2 and Terminator 2. I agree Afterlife feels allot like Force Awakens.
Nah, Ghostbusters 2 and A Force Awakens are like siblings... not Afterlife.
With Force Awakens, instead of R2-D2 hiding the plans, it's BB-8 with the map. Instead of Luke on the desert planet, it's Rey. Instead of the Mos Eisley Cantina it's the Mas Cantina. Instead of old man Obi-wan dying, we get old man Han. Instead of the Rebels Assault the Death Star we get the Rebels fighting the Star Killer, etc. etc. etc.
You get the same thing, even worse, in "Ghostbusters 2". No one believes in ghosts again, then there's a ghost event surrounding Dana Barrett again, and Venkman and Dana start a budding romance again, ghosts start to appear again, queue montage of Ghostbusters again, with an end-of-world event occurring, only for the Ghostbusters to be locked up again by a prick who is working with the mayor again, only for mayor to bust the Ghostbusters out of lock-up again, and let them do their thing again, to save the day again, and New Yorkers to cheer and love them again, etc. etc. etc. Nah, to me Afterlife does a lot more different,
even with a familiar vilian.
You got a point, though the whole "it's been 30 years and many things happened, but the situation is somehow identical again" fits the FA bill like hand in the glove.
GB2 is more like Return of the Jedi. It has the original cast in their prime attacking yet another Death Star but the whole spinn is different enough. Besides it's hard not to love the court scene and Titanic coming back ;D end the Statue of Liberty climax was outstanding. If I were a Newyorker, I love that for sure!
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 07:28:07 PM
You got a point, though the whole "it's been 30 years and many things happened, but the situation is somehow identical again" fits the FA bill like hand in the glove.
I don't quite see it as identical films, other than an unvanquished antagonist's return and the rules that follow that unvanquished antagonist. But your way of thinking on this is not alone, and it does seem one's perspective on this becomes that line where many positive and negative reviewers stake their flags.
QuoteGB2 is more like Return of the Jedi. It has the original cast in their prime attacking yet another Death Star but the whole spinn is different enough.
Yeah, to me, you have it backwards. Afterlife is like Return of the Jedi, where the majority of the movie is different from A New Hope (even though there is that goal again at the end of the film to stop a Death Star) where GB2 just retreads GB1's major beats like The Force Awakens does to A New Hope, slapping it with new names and new paint and calling it different.
But the names and faces are thesame in GB2! :D
You know what? I'll stop right here. I'm happy you liked new one and yet I prefere the former sequel. I'm not saying new one is bad, just that older is better. I know you think different and I'm okay with that.
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 09:25:36 PM
But the names and faces are thesame in GB2! :D
You know what I mean ya goofball! :D Walter Peck to Jack Hardemeyer... Gozer to Viggo.. big tall mean Stay Puft to big tall controlled Lady Liberty
Sequel! Thats exactly a sequel made in 80's! Predator hunting in jungle vs Predator hunting in city! MacLane fighting in the skyscraper offing badguys helped by black cop vs MacLane offing badguys at the airport helped by black aircontroler! Sarah Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in factory vs John Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in goddamn factory! Ripley dropping aliens into space through airlock! Twice! All beats in her story are exactly thesame! Thats how you did sequels back in the day and they are incomparable with today standards. I don't think it's good though. 80's and 90's gave us the best movies.
These photos remind me of the "stunt double" scene from Spaceballs.
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 10:57:15 PM
Predator hunting in jungle vs Predator hunting in city!
Ooh, now you're fighting dirty :D
Quote from: Kradan on Nov 22, 2021, 03:00:21 PM
https://youtu.be/nMtrjNPcjR0 (https://youtu.be/nMtrjNPcjR0)
I haven't watched the movie and I'm only halfway through the review but I already despise this movie with every fibre of my soul for its cynical exploitation of nostalgia
Tell me "But you should've watched movie first" all you want. I don't care, f**k it. I hate Afterlife
Quote from: Kradan on Nov 22, 2021, 11:05:46 PM
Tell me "But you should've watched movie first" all you want. I don't care, f**k it. I hate Afterlife
Same. It sounds awful.
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 10:57:15 PM
Sequel! Thats exactly a sequel made in 80's! Predator hunting in jungle vs Predator hunting in city! MacLane fighting in the skyscraper offing badguys helped by black cop vs MacLane offing badguys at the airport helped by black aircontroler! Sarah Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in factory vs John Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in goddamn factory! Ripley dropping aliens into space through airlock! Twice! All beats in her story are exactly thesame! Thats how you did sequels back in the day and they are incomparable with today standards. I don't think it's good though. 80's and 90's gave us the best movies.
Let's be fair. Aliens isn't widely criticized for that. Neither is Predator 2. But Ghostbusters 2 is widely criticized for aping the original and repeating the same narrative structure too much and too closely of Ghostbusters.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Nov 23, 2021, 12:17:25 AM
Quote from: Kradan on Nov 22, 2021, 11:05:46 PM
Tell me "But you should've watched movie first" all you want. I don't care, f**k it. I hate Afterlife
Same. It sounds awful.
Counterpoint: Ghostbusters Afterlife is simultaneously cool while also being good.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 23, 2021, 12:29:48 AM
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 10:57:15 PM
Sequel! Thats exactly a sequel made in 80's! Predator hunting in jungle vs Predator hunting in city! MacLane fighting in the skyscraper offing badguys helped by black cop vs MacLane offing badguys at the airport helped by black aircontroler! Sarah Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in factory vs John Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in goddamn factory! Ripley dropping aliens into space through airlock! Twice! All beats in her story are exactly thesame! Thats how you did sequels back in the day and they are incomparable with today standards. I don't think it's good though. 80's and 90's gave us the best movies.
Let's be fair. Aliens isn't widely criticized for that. Neither is Predator 2. But Ghostbusters 2 is widely criticized for aping the original and repeating the same narrative structure too much and too closely of Ghostbusters.
Predator 2 was also criticized for great many things and didn't allow for P3 to happen in the best possible time. Same with GB2. I love it, you clearly don't.
Quote from: Master on Nov 23, 2021, 11:07:06 AM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 23, 2021, 12:29:48 AM
Quote from: Master on Nov 22, 2021, 10:57:15 PM
Sequel! Thats exactly a sequel made in 80's! Predator hunting in jungle vs Predator hunting in city! MacLane fighting in the skyscraper offing badguys helped by black cop vs MacLane offing badguys at the airport helped by black aircontroler! Sarah Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in factory vs John Connor protected by future warrior against robot from future destroyed in goddamn factory! Ripley dropping aliens into space through airlock! Twice! All beats in her story are exactly thesame! Thats how you did sequels back in the day and they are incomparable with today standards. I don't think it's good though. 80's and 90's gave us the best movies.
Let's be fair. Aliens isn't widely criticized for that. Neither is Predator 2. But Ghostbusters 2 is widely criticized for aping the original and repeating the same narrative structure too much and too closely of Ghostbusters.
Predator 2 was also criticized for great many things and didn't allow for P3 to happen in the best possible time. Same with GB2. I love it, you clearly don't.
Absolutely "Predator 2" was widely maligned and widely criticized for a great many things, especially upon release. But aping the original film wasn't one of them. ("Predators", now that's a different story.)
Not knocking that you love GB2 brother. Love it to your hearts content! This was just a discussion of Afterlife and how much it apes the original, and our debate which film does it worse. And it's probably run its course. :)
Cheers!
My biggest concern about Afterlife is awfully annoying mother character and the fact it dosent bring anything new to the franchise.
Quote from: Xenomrph on Nov 23, 2021, 07:40:53 AM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Nov 23, 2021, 12:17:25 AM
Quote from: Kradan on Nov 22, 2021, 11:05:46 PM
Tell me "But you should've watched movie first" all you want. I don't care, f**k it. I hate Afterlife
Same. It sounds awful.
Counterpoint: Ghostbusters Afterlife is simultaneously cool while also being good.
Are you suggesting that I should forego the ice cream?
I suggest you enjoy a cool, good movie
Did you like the 2016 movie?
Haven't watched it yet, although a coworker just let me borrow it today. I don't have high hopes.
I did just watch the original movie in 4K last night, that was a good time.
As much as I liked the movie...
Spoiler
Shandor should have been the central villain, with a new backup plan because the Gozer scheme in NYC failed. Hell, they got J.K. Simmons and they didn't even use him, he didn't even throw a single cymbal. :laugh:
I remember being convinced that Chevy Chase and John Candy were going to headline Ghostbusters 2 back in the day as a Chicago "franchise" (like Venkman hinted at in the first movie). They both showed up in the music video, which only reinforced that belief.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fe93CLbHjxQTo be honest, it made perfect sense at the time. Chase and Candy would have made great counterparts to Murray and Aykroyd.
Quote from: KiramidHead on Nov 24, 2021, 05:46:27 AM
As much as I liked the movie...
Spoiler
Shandor should have been the central villain, with a new backup plan because the Gozer scheme in NYC failed. Hell, they got J.K. Simmons and they didn't even use him, he didn't even throw a single cymbal. :laugh:
Kudos for the Whiplash reference!
Quote from: KiramidHead on Nov 24, 2021, 05:46:27 AM
As much as I liked the movie...
Spoiler
Shandor should have been the central villain, with a new backup plan because the Gozer scheme in NYC failed. Hell, they got J.K. Simmons and they didn't even use him, he didn't even throw a single cymbal. :laugh:
Spoiler
My man! When I saw Shandor I thought he'll play the major part. Then died? like bitch...
Walter Peck's ghost would be a great villain 👻
(https://i.ibb.co/9HPggz3/walter-peck-1336005-normal.jpg)
Quote from: Immortan Jonesy on Nov 24, 2021, 07:06:13 PM
Walter Peck's ghost would be a great villain 👻
https://i.ibb.co/9HPggz3/walter-peck-1336005-normal.jpg
Especially if his death was due to a marshmallow sugar overdose!
(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MajesticAnxiousAlpinegoat-max-1mb.gif)
Even his ghost has no dick.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Nov 24, 2021, 10:56:15 PM
Quote from: Immortan Jonesy on Nov 24, 2021, 07:06:13 PM
Walter Peck's ghost would be a great villain 👻
https://i.ibb.co/9HPggz3/walter-peck-1336005-normal.jpg
Especially if his death was due to a marshmallow sugar overdose!
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/MajesticAnxiousAlpinegoat-max-1mb.gif
:laugh:
Quote from: KiramidHead on Nov 25, 2021, 12:47:55 AM
Even his ghost has no dick.
That may upset some ghosts.
(https://i.ibb.co/xJJDK30/1mih1rf9ry2plzvmzvmn-ayk-e1468052487997.jpg)
(https://s8.gifyu.com/images/gif-3.gif)
Quote from: KiramidHead on Nov 25, 2021, 12:47:55 AM
Even his ghost has no dick.
No dick
No balls
And probably no butthole since ghosts can feed on radiation
The rummor has it that Vigo the Scourge of Carpathia, the Sorrow of Moldavia will be anthagonist of GB4.
So..there's no werechicken in the sequel? aaaw :'(
(https://i.ibb.co/9vJLDWY/Egon-Werechicken.png)
Spoiler
https://youtu.be/mgiQDzcEUps
Saw it yesterday. It was good, wasn't mind-blowing but wasn't terrible like GB 2016. It absolutely was a love letter the the series as a whole and to Harold Ramis, I legit had tears at the end and no shame admitting that.
Crazy to think the last GB film I saw in cinemas was GBII back in 89 and that was my first film I saw in cinemas when I was 4 years old. I'm interested to see where they take the series next.
It was definitely a love letter to the original that was full of heart, if not a fully fleshed out film in its own right. It was a great antidote for that 2016... effort.
The post-credits scenes made me think that it would really work having the old team (minus Ramis obviously) back together again.
Overall a good sequel but didn't anyone else think it would have actually have been better as a mini series? Like they could have done lot more with the setting and explored the whole Shandor thing.
Quote from: irn on Dec 07, 2021, 12:00:53 PM
The post-credits scenes made me think that it would really work having the old team (minus Ramis obviously) back together again.
Spoiler
I'm just expecting Ernie Hudson to be back, financing the new young team, if another sequel does eventually and hopefully come our way.
QuoteOverall a good sequel but didn't anyone else think it would have actually have been better as a mini series? Like they could have done lot more with the setting and explored the whole Shandor thing.
I could see that!
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Dec 07, 2021, 02:00:31 PM
Spoiler
I'm just expecting Ernie Hudson to be back, financing the new young team, if another sequel does eventually and hopefully come our way.
Spoiler
Ernie Hudson has said in a recent interview that that's exactly what he hopes will happen
They did a PHENOMENAL job recreating the Terror Dogs...
(https://scontent-fco2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/259491072_4781248028586594_7071868403080977703_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=wzhKFh53nmUAX94kKdk&_nc_oc=AQlqj7O5mmD9du9gKLjBepIMzEPFN88AYbAtc6MaWs7r24o91Fqt6OJ-GPzWHkJVf9c&_nc_ht=scontent-fco2-1.xx&oh=61c444bab34702b220d1fdd6f2d38256&oe=61B6CE28)
(https://scontent-fco2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/258763090_4781248431919887_4871199524554007352_n.jpg?_nc_cat=107&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=JTuqHYV60UsAX-mc2FI&tn=OvvXXIyW_sQOudya&_nc_ht=scontent-fco2-1.xx&oh=561e498a9e9a9fdb4c5b9658d2282517&oe=61B7451B)
I love the practical work done on terror dogs, but they do look different then originals.
I just got bukkaked by this movie.
I thought it was a bit too Nickelodeon and maudlin, but it was still better than I expected.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jan 05, 2022, 12:16:28 AM
I just got bukkaked by this movie.
I don't know how to process this.
Pffft, only elite that watches RLM knows 8)
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 06, 2022, 01:19:38 PM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jan 05, 2022, 12:16:28 AM
I just got bukkaked by this movie.
I don't know how to process this.
With a big martini glass?
I wish Bill Murray could have been more smarmy. He's really mellowed.
If there's another one, I sure hope it gets back to its NYC roots and doesn't take place in Bumblef**k, Oklahoma again.
Switched off after five minutes. Utter garbage. The dialogue amongst the school children was pathetic.
Quote from: Rudiger on Jan 21, 2022, 06:54:01 PM
Switched off after five minutes. Utter garbage. The dialogue amongst the school children was pathetic.
You missed out, the movie becomes stellar at precisely the 6th minute and never stops.
Quote from: Xenomrph on Jan 21, 2022, 11:22:09 PM
Quote from: Rudiger on Jan 21, 2022, 06:54:01 PM
Switched off after five minutes. Utter garbage. The dialogue amongst the school children was pathetic.
You missed out, the movie becomes stellar at precisely the 6th minute and never stops.
And the school children do not appear in the first 5 minutes. ;D
I enjoyed and liked the film :)
I didn't watch the original movies (or I watched them when I was too little and can't remember much) but I know the basic plot and such.
I think the final act tries to bring back a lot of things from the first movies and I didn't feel like it made a favour to us who are not that much into GB. Probably should have gone with something fresh instead.
Quote from: Rudiger on Jan 21, 2022, 06:54:01 PM
Switched off after five minutes. Utter garbage. The dialogue amongst the school children was pathetic.
Oh I gotta agree the kids are SOOO annoying in the first act of the movie.
But then it gets much better.
Quote from: Magegg on Jan 22, 2022, 03:27:34 PM
I enjoyed and liked the film :)
I didn't watch the original movies (or I watched them when I was too little and can't remember much) but I know the basic plot and such.
I think the final act tries to bring back a lot of things from the first movies and I didn't feel like it made a favour to us who are not that much into GB. Probably should have gone with something fresh instead.
Quote from: Rudiger on Jan 21, 2022, 06:54:01 PM
Switched off after five minutes. Utter garbage. The dialogue amongst the school children was pathetic.
Oh I gotta agree the kids are SOOO annoying in the first act of the movie.
But then it gets much better.
A lot of the enjoyment of Afterlife is contingent on being familiar with and liking the first Ghostbusters movie. The number of callbacks and fan service elements is through the roof and the movie coasts really heavily on nostalgia. If you liked it without having seen the original movie, I suspect you'd have loved it if you had seen the original movie.
https://youtu.be/V2KCTrnp2mU (https://youtu.be/V2KCTrnp2mU)
RIP
Thank you for all the laughs
https://twitter.com/Borys_Kit/status/1493078766825865217
Man this really f**king sucks!
Ghostbusters is always the first thing to come to mind when I think of the early years of my childhood. I could do with watching Both GB, GB2 and Afterlife all in one sitting soon. See you on the other side, Reitman. Thank you.
I think the silver lining is that at least Ivan got to see his son's love letter to him before he passed.
https://twitter.com/DEADLINE/status/1518787935922962433
(https://c.tenor.com/lfey4I3UJuIAAAAC/chris-pratt-excited.gif)
Urgh, after the abysmal 'member berries fest that was the last one and the god awful 2016 reboot, I'd sooner they just leave it be. There's only so much eye-rape that a man can take.
Is this the one where the new cast will be expected to carry the series on their own?
Spoiler
Good luck.
https://youtu.be/V2KCTrnp2mU (https://youtu.be/V2KCTrnp2mU)
Quotempc_film #MPC was entrusted with bringing the character of Dr. Egon Spengler, who had been played by the late Harold Ramis back to the big screens for Ghostbusters: Afterlife. As June 8th marks #GhostbustersDay, we're pleased to share the making of video of how we did it.
Read more about MPC's work over on our website! Link in bio.
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534743058767523840
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534744300843520000
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534745111854141440
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534745284600733697
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534745775065821185
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534746294270296064
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534746828184252416
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534747158653505536
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1534738333141635072
https://twitter.com/Borys_Kit/status/1541821487958458369
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1637858394290929664
Casting news
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1639321285623963648
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1666928090315104256
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1666822408949596168
I didn't even know Ghostbusters Day was a thing. Does the date mean something, like May the 4th and (LV)4/26?
Quote from: Xenomrph on Jun 09, 2023, 04:40:02 AMI didn't even know Ghostbusters Day was a thing. Does the date mean something, like May the 4th and (LV)4/26?
Original release date
Release date: June 8, 1984 (USA)
Fair enough
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jan 06, 2022, 10:03:04 PMQuote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 06, 2022, 01:19:38 PMQuote from: Local Trouble on Jan 05, 2022, 12:16:28 AMI just got bukkaked by this movie.
I don't know how to process this.
With a big martini glass?
I wish Bill Murray could have been more smarmy. He's really mellowed.
If there's another one, I sure hope it gets back to its NYC roots and doesn't take place in Bumblef**k, Oklahoma again.
Unlike the 80s, I think a lot of the current movie producers are afraid to offend people.
https://twitter.com/screencrushnews/status/1686371418076758016
https://twitter.com/GeekTyrant/status/1702142347784659097
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1718002152579494389
Quote from: ace3g on Oct 28, 2023, 06:26:40 AMhttps://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1718002152579494389
I backed it, and it's already at over 8k backers. Not bad for one day in.
Trailer incoming?
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1719400793441489366
New game?
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1721920449574023469
Did not expect that honestly.
The Wendigo lives.
I'm ready for round two of nostalgia bukkake.
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1734344828731666913
https://twitter.com/BDisgusting/status/1736754553469407597
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1736748628033536201
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1737110554270199873
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GBt-g2XbUAAn3NV?format=jpg&name=large)
https://twitter.com/Collider/status/1745158105082544556
Quote from: ace3g on Jan 10, 2024, 09:08:17 PMhttps://twitter.com/Collider/status/1745158105082544556
Wait Ghostbusters already got a 4K release. Like, I own it.
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1745853719734813063
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1745871976827097569
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1745883593308598407
(https://ghostbustersnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/ghostbusters_frozen_empire_paul_rudd_carrie_coon.webp)
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1746866106923458851
https://twitter.com/empiremagazine/status/1746956160932946336
(https://s8d6.turboimg.net/sp/d56831c964d65bfda47771599b7168ec/gbfe6.jpg)
https://twitter.com/BDisgusting/status/1748014345454309451
https://twitter.com/GhostbustersNet/status/1748016047393812987
https://twitter.com/MI_Ghostbusters/status/1747821488630083737
https://twitter.com/ghostofkaraoke/status/1748012736775074222
(https://ghostbustersnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/mini_puft_frozen_empire_article.webp)
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1751651348377149885
Ha the library ghost returns. It was the creepiest and scariest moment of the 80s... possibly imo ;D
More nostalgia bukkake.
That is true
https://twitter.com/GBNewsdotcom/status/1756014564284522598
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1760680859034591410
https://twitter.com/SonyPicturesAUS/status/1760766869295054986
https://twitter.com/totalfilm/status/1762447582117134690
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1765104998264799500
Any love for the Real Ghostbursters? Watched some episodes with the kids and they love it.
Favorite one seems to be "Slimer, Come Home".
https://twitter.com/Ghostbusters/status/1769846240584646740
Spoiler
Mix bag review: Garraka was under-utilized only showing up in the 3rd act and did we really need a character called the Fire Master? Not everything has to sound like the Key Master.
Some things should just be a single film, if that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2KCTrnp2mUQuote from: BlueMarsalis79 on Mar 25, 2024, 02:42:25 AMSome things should just be a single film, if that.
There's only one acceptable version of a Ghostbusters sequel
Spoiler
The one drunk Mike Stoklasa came up with
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdoaW6A_VkkSpoiler
Psssst...
Spoiler
I don't even like the original.
Spoiler
Not even the slightest.
I have a deep love for the original. It stands with my favorite childhood movies like Gremlins, Ninja Turtles, Back to the Future Terminator, Aliens, and Predator.
The 80s and early 90s were a great time to be a kid, as far as movies go.
I'm not a big Bill Murray fan, but yeah; the original movie deserves all that love for sure.
I do not like him as a comedian at all, give me Lost in Translation any day though.
Quote from: BlueMarsalis79 on Mar 25, 2024, 01:06:05 PMI do not like him as a comedian at all, give me Lost in Translation any day though.
My favorite Murray film after What About Bob?
Quote from: BlueMarsalis79 on Mar 25, 2024, 02:42:25 AMSome things should just be a single film, if that.
I agree, Ghostbusters, Jurassic, Jaws, and etc.