Ghostbusters (2016) | Movie News/ Discussion *Now Spoilers*

bralinator

I've gotta admit, this looks like fan-fic or cosplay to me. Not instilling much confidence, but who knows? It might rock.



Story here

Mr_Cosmic

Which one is supposed to be Larry Storch?

bamfbamf

it looks so bad, I actually want it do well now!

WetRats

bralinator said:

I've gotta admit, this looks like fan-fic or cosplay to me. Not instilling much confidence, but who knows? It might rock.



Story here

I think it looks perfect!

It captures the spirit of the original without slavishly aping the uniforms.

David_D

I'm game.

David_D

I'm also a big fan of the guy they cast to play the villain. I've seen him do comedy at UCB in NY, as well as at commercial auditions. It's great to see a talented and hard working guy like that get a big bump up.

playdohsrepublic

"Look at that proton pack, it's not nearly protony enough"

"Ecto-1 is a hearse now?!? Everyone knows it's supposed to be a ambulance!"

"Ugh, orange safety stripes on the suits? How PC is that?"

batlaw

This all just looks and sounds so incredibly awful to me.

playdohsrepublic

batlaw said:

This all just looks and sounds so incredibly awful to me.

So I'm curious. What looks and sounds awful? I can get behind the idea that a reboot is not necessary, plus no Harold Ramis and no Peter Venkman and therefore this is a flawed production. But we know nothing about the plot yet, except that it's basically Ghostbusters. So what exactly have we seen that wouldn't be in any reboot/remake/belated sequel of Ghostbusters?

luke52

Ghostbusters I & II are two of all time favs, I grew up surrounded by all thing Ghostbustery. I loved the comics old and recent. I loved the toys. I loved the TV show. I loved the recent ps game. But this, and I'm trying to keep an open mind. But this just feels like another Crystal Skull to me. A film I'm gonna have to pretend was never made. Nothing about it has me excited. And that makes me a bit sad.

Brack

Ghostbusters 2 was a crushing disappointment (any number of TMS-era eps of Real Ghostbusters are better than the movie sequel). So this already has a low bar in terms of being better than the last Ghostbusters movie.

Even without that, I am really looking forward to this remake, as I loved The Heat and if you are going to do a remake, this seems a smart way of remaking something. And compared to the other Ghostbusters idea at Sony, this is far closer to the original, in that it stars people with improv backgrounds who look like normal humans.

DoctorDoom

I thought I'd hate the Heat, and I ended up loving it.

I'll give this a shot when this comes out..... on DVD.

RepoMan

Brack said:

Ghostbusters 2 was a crushing disappointment (any number of TMS-era eps of Real Ghostbusters are better than the movie sequel). So this already has a low bar in terms of being better than the last Ghostbusters movie.

Even without that, I am really looking forward to this remake, as I loved The Heat and if you are going to do a remake, this seems a smart way of remaking something. And compared to the other Ghostbusters idea at Sony, this is far closer to the original, in that it stars people with improv backgrounds who look like normal humans.

QFT!

playdohsrepublic

Here are some headlines that would turn me off to this movie:

"Gozer to be hipster blogger"

"Ray and Winston revealed to be twin brothers"

"Shia La Beouf will reportedly play Oscar Barrett"

"Stay Puft motion-capture to be performed by Dwayne the Rock Johnson"

"Ghostbusters 'darker, edgier' reboot produced by Michael Bay's Platinum Dunes"

"Dogs and cats to be featured actually living together, 'It's time,' says director"

DoctorDoom

playdohsrepublic said:

"Stay Puft motion-capture to be performed by Dwayne the Rock Johnson"

...I would love that. Or he could play Gozer.

bralinator

playdohsrepublic said:

batlaw said:

This all just looks and sounds so incredibly awful to me.

So I'm curious. What looks and sounds awful?

You said it in your reply. This reboot is not necessary, and there is no Harold Ramis and no Bill Murray, therefore this is a flawed production.

playdohsrepublic said:

What exactly have we seen that shouldn't be in any reboot/remake/belated sequel of Ghostbusters?

This cast photo for one. It looks like a cosplay pic. Just because someone isn't jazzed about an all-female reboot doesn't mean they're a misogynist, in spite of what the Jezebel website might say or what anyone might think. And for the record, this is a hard reboot, not a sequel. So, even an all-male cast for this project would elicit groans (oh wait, it already did and they cancelled it).

You want to make it interesting? Go with an all-minority cast and balance the genders. Then, get Murray on board with Aykroyd and Hudson to do the hiring of this team during the first act, acting as their mentors. BOOM! Comedy gold! Nah, they're going with a full hard-reboot, oh yes and the director says it will be 'really scary' too, but don't worry GB fans, we'll include lots of Easter eggs and callbacks to the original! That means if it fails to make as much money as the original did, America is a sexist nation that must be shamed... with a sequel! No one mentions that crowning the heirs to Venkman and Spengler’s proton packs is no light matter, so just going with 3 white actresses and one black one seems a bit lazy to me.

It's not just the casting. Are there no more new ideas? Personally, I find this about as intriguing as the recent Footloose remake. Some people want Hollywood to come up with new ideas instead of constantly retooling movies that were done right the first time (see: Robocop). Granted, not all reboots are a waste of time. Mad Max: Fury Road was exceptional! It also boasted a strong cast of women and was an outstanding action flick that I will watch again. I even hope to see a sequel within a year or two.

Here, instead of a gender-balanced squad the GB franchise has completely gender-swapped it to give us an all-female team. So do women and men need their own separate entertainment? Like we now need pink versions of stuff? Isn't that a bit outmoded and sexist itself? Who's up for an all-dude version of Charlie's Angels or an all-female casted Reservoir Dogs .. really? But, of course you are. Okay, okay, even I would check-out The Expendabelles on Netflix... But, if you can't see how a GB hard-reboot of "bridesmaids chasing ghosts" is merely a pandering cash-grab in the first place, then you're probably asking "why is an all-female cast a "gimmick", but the all-male original cast isn't, huh?"

Because 'Ghostbusters' didn't promote itself based on the fact that it was "male only", hence the gimmick. It was just a great comedy with a clever premise and a solid cast.


Bill Murray looks like a prophetic genius for not wanting to touch any GB reboot/remake because this screams "massive-fail."

kiwijase

I like it. I've never been a huge fan of the original film so I'm not overly concerned if liberties are taken, though I'm glad to see they've kept the original Ghostbusters logo.

bralinator

Wait, this could be a game-changer.

A female spin on a predominately male-centric genre.

https://youtu.be/ltijEmlyqlg

Full of laughs? Same director and star!

RepoMan

I love how naysayers always want it to be known that they have every right to be contrarian and they are proud of their opinions, but anyone else who has an opinion somehow can't think for themselves and only gets their thoughts from magazines and websites. If that isn't some paranoid, privileged double speak, I don't know what it is. Haha.

kiwijase said:

I like it. I've never been a huge fan of the original film so I'm not overly concerned if liberties are taken, though I'm glad to see they've kept the original Ghostbusters logo.

I feel the same. I can recognize that the original is a fun time capsule but the sloppiness of the sequel shows that it's not a bonafide formula that needs to be cherished and put on the shelf. Maybe this dusting off will prove worthy, maybe not. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be attempted. This version was just lucky enough to get green lit. It's not their fault the originals couldn't get their acts together.

David_D

I know-- it's so hard for those put upon white guys to get work in Hollywood these days!

David_D

At the end of the day, my Ghostbusters-loving daughter saw this picture and is excited for it. In fact, the first thing she said was, "like the comic I read!" (as she read an all-female team in the last IDW volume of GB).

So, you'll forgive me if that matters more to me than what other dudes my age think of this.

We already got ours.

bralinator

RepoMan said:

the sloppiness of the sequel shows that it's not a bonafide formula that needs to be cherished and put on the shelf.

David_D said:

it's so hard for those put upon white guys to get work in Hollywood these days!

Wait though, it looks like they're sticking to the three white characters and only one black character, just a gender swap. Guess it's pretty formulaic after all. Hooray for diversity.


If Bill Murray wants nothing to do with it, he must not have a very good agent apparently.

Brack

bralinator said:

If Bill Murray wants nothing to do with it, he must not have a very good agent apparently.

He wanted nothing to do with Ghostbusters when Aykroyd was the main voice wanting a second sequel.

playdohsrepublic

bralinator said:

Wait, this could be a game-changer.

A female spin on a predominately male-centric genre.

https://youtu.be/ltijEmlyqlg

Full of laughs? Same director and star!

Is this facetious? Because Spy was probably the best reviewed comedy of the year so far.

Can I just say, I feel like I'm falling into the defender role here. I'm really not. I do think it's an unnecessary reboot. But we've already had a mediocre and unnecessary Ghostbusters movie. I have a lot of nostalgia for Ghostbusters II, but it's inferior in every way to the original. As are all the ancillary expanded Ghostbusters projects. There really hasn't been anything that shows this movie will be worse than that. Which, if it's not, would make it the 2nd best Ghostbusters movie. Are there people really hoping it will match the original? Is there a version of a third Ghostbusters movie that actually seems like a good idea?

DoctorDoom

bralinator said:

Angels... or an all-female casted Reservoir Dogs...

To be fair, I would watch that on Netflix.

Hell, I only just watched the original last month!

hauberk

I'm passing but it's entirely based on Kristin Wiig, Kate McKinnon and Melissa McCarthy McKinnon can occasionally pull off funny, but Kristin Wiig is, for me, something of a blackhole of comedy - even the most powerful of jokes isn't going to survive her presence.

RepoMan

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2015/07/14/dan-aykroyd-confirmed-for-new-ghostbusters-cameo/

Planeis

I'm not for it. I've got nothing against these people, but there's only one Ghostbusters story I was interested in, and that was one more featuring Ray, Pete, Egon, Winston, Dana and Janine. Preferably played by their original actors, but I would have been open to re-casts given everyones age.

I have no reason to care about this movie. Its not even going to be an in movie "franchise" of the original Ghostbusters. It won't be called Ghostbusters 3 and it shouldn't be. This is a re-boot, not a re-tool or a recast. No thank you.

Matt

Is this definitely a "reboot" as opposed to just another in the series? Extreme Ghostbusters was billed as a followed up TV series to The Real Ghostbusters.

M

Matt

playdohsrepublic said:

"Look at that proton pack, it's not nearly protony enough"

"Ecto-1 is a hearse now?!? Everyone knows it's supposed to be a ambulance!"

"Ugh, orange safety stripes on the suits? How PC is that?"

Truthfully, the only thing about the safety stripes I found eye catching & off putting were the ones directly over their bosoms. Seems unnecessary.

M

Matt

bralinator said:

playdohsrepublic said:

batlaw said:

This all just looks and sounds so incredibly awful to me.

So I'm curious. What looks and sounds awful?

You said it in your reply. This reboot is not necessary, and there is no Harold Ramis and no Bill Murray, therefore this is a flawed production.

playdohsrepublic said:

What exactly have we seen that shouldn't be in any reboot/remake/belated sequel of Ghostbusters?

This cast photo for one. It looks like a cosplay pic. Just because someone isn't jazzed about an all-female reboot doesn't mean they're a misogynist, in spite of what the Jezebel website might say or what anyone might think. And for the record, this is a hard reboot, not a sequel. So, even an all-male cast for this project would elicit groans (oh wait, it already did and they cancelled it).

You want to make it interesting? Go with an all-minority cast and balance the genders. Then, get Murray on board with Aykroyd and Hudson to do the hiring of this team during the first act, acting as their mentors. BOOM! Comedy gold! Nah, they're going with a full hard-reboot, oh yes and the director says it will be 'really scary' too, but don't worry GB fans, we'll include lots of Easter eggs and callbacks to the original! That means if it fails to make as much money as the original did, America is a sexist nation that must be shamed... with a sequel! No one mentions that crowning the heirs to Venkman and Spengler’s proton packs is no light matter, so just going with 3 white actresses and one black one seems a bit lazy to me.

It's not just the casting. Are there no more new ideas? Personally, I find this about as intriguing as the recent Footloose remake. Some people want Hollywood to come up with new ideas instead of constantly retooling movies that were done right the first time (see: Robocop). Granted, not all reboots are a waste of time. Mad Max: Fury Road was exceptional! It also boasted a strong cast of women and was an outstanding action flick that I will watch again. I even hope to see a sequel within a year or two.

Here, instead of a gender-balanced squad the GB franchise has completely gender-swapped it to give us an all-female team. So do women and men need their own separate entertainment? Like we now need pink versions of stuff? Isn't that a bit outmoded and sexist itself? Who's up for an all-dude version of Charlie's Angels or an all-female casted Reservoir Dogs .. really? But, of course you are. Okay, okay, even I would check-out The Expendabelles on Netflix... But, if you can't see how a GB hard-reboot of "bridesmaids chasing ghosts" is merely a pandering cash-grab in the first place, then you're probably asking "why is an all-female cast a "gimmick", but the all-male original cast isn't, huh?"

Because 'Ghostbusters' didn't promote itself based on the fact that it was "male only", hence the gimmick. It was just a great comedy with a clever premise and a solid cast.


Bill Murray looks like a prophetic genius for not wanting to touch any GB reboot/remake because this screams "massive-fail."

I opted to see AoU for a 2nd time instead of Fury Road, but is that really a reboot? I was under the impression it was just another in the series.

M