[Sharky58]

What do you think about the film? I am just wondering out loud whatever it should have been Ghostbusters 3 rather than a reboot. It has been 27 years since the events of Ghostbusters 2. And like the first film. the 2nd film took off from where the first left off. Like Ecto-1 was about to break down at the start of the 2nd film. and the guys were out doing seperate jobs until they had a huge hit under first street. They sent Ray down there to see whats going on. I had wondered where was Wiston the whole time? He wasnt arrested after the guys cut the power off when getting Ray out of the hole.

Honestly. I think when we had all female ghostbusters. it looked as if the guys, Peter, Ray and Wiston as well as Janine had either retired or had other jobs. Egon had died. On one of the scrips that I read somewhere like Wikipedia. Dan said that his character, Ray is blind on one eye and cannot drive the caddy. He also had a bad knee so he couldnt carry the packs. Egon would be too large to fit in a pack. As for Peter. he either left the team for Dana.

I had assume that The new Ecto-1 could have been Ecto-1C or something. the Ecto-1A wither was sold to a private owner. as well as the ghost catching gear may have been autioned off or distorried. Or maybe Ecto-1A went to the crushers? The New York Fire dept had bought the old Ghostbuster's firehouse and converted it to the Hook and Ladder.

As for the ghosts that the new team is battling again. Pernaps, it excaped from the contanment unit, either if it was tampered with or it was moved.

And the new team's headquarters was on the Chinese restaurant.

No I havent seen the movie yet but I will wait for the DVD. I was just basiclly staying with the storyline what it would have been 27 years ago.

Paul could have put it together as the 3rd film. the reboot almost didnt make sense. Of course they had the guys from the first 2 films show up as comeo apperances.

Imange if guys would keep their roles. You could see Ray come to the new team's headquarters to drip off some data or other stuff for the new team. I know Egon had made alot of investments. (according to The Real Ghostbusters and Extreme Ghostbusters) so pernaps Egon has made notes and wrote books. Ray could have bought it all up to the team. or it would have been distoried and the new team get their own ideas. either way.

I did write Paul an email. but of course, he didnt respond. I will have to post it on here another time.

Even though I havent seen the movie. I did see it on youtube reviews. or a teaser thriller, read on Wikipedia. and so forth. I just want to know what you all think?

The new team's flight suits are different. I hope these are reflector strips sewn on so they could be seen at night?

I am happy the women have the starring roles. Nowdays women can do just about anything and it is no longer men that can do everything.

Ok let me see what ya all have to say.

[EddieSpenser]

The more I think about it, the more I hate it.
The plot-holes killed the pace and it's way too long. The "big battle" was ridiculous. Some of the dialogues were super cringy (Abby's dean, god damn). And Melissa McCarthy can't stop over-acting.
The misandry was the cherry on the cake and don't say there's none, every male characters are depicted as morons or assholes aside from Ernie Hudson.

It's a bad carbon copy of GB1, a bad movie that as tarnished the licence and I'm glad the audience reacted the way it did.

[Commander_Jim]

Judged as a standalone movie, as if GB never existed and it was just a random summer comedy - it was OK. It wasnt great, the jokes fell flat way more often than they landed, but the characters were likeable enough and it had enough entertainment value that I didnt feel ripped off in time and money by having seen it.

BUT as a Ghostbusters movie, it was terrible. I think the very last thing on earth the franchise needed with only two existing movies was a remake of the first film and throwing away the original characters and continuity when there was so much more that could have been done with the original GB universe was just a waste. Who needs a remake of such a popular and well known movie anyway? Its like remaking Back to the Future - why? The movie hasnt been forgotten, its more popular than ever and everyone still loves it, so what is the purpose of a remake?

The tone and style was way off. GB was never a silly comedy. It was a comedy because it happened to feature characters who were funny people and because of the absurdity of some of the things that happen, but it was very much set in the real world, and the horror was real, the end-of-the-world stakes were real. In GB'16 its a cartoon comedy universe where every character is tongue-in-cheek and doing a bit and it never feels like theres really anything at stake when the villain is dancing around playing it for laughs. The stakes feel about as real as in something like Pixels. It feels more like a GB parody than a proper new GB film. Its like what Seth Rogan's Green Hornet was to The Green Hornet.

So while I didnt hate it, I am glad its lack of box office success has pretty much ensured that this will not be the future of the GB franchise.

[Alphagaia]

Hiya guys, does this thread serve any different purpose when compared to the review thread? Because I see the same people just kinda repeating their statements from that one?

[Raystantz Italy]

Do we need Alphagaia doing the moderators job?

[JurorNo.2]

Do we need Alphagaia doing the moderators job?

And if the reviews on this thread were mostly positive, you'd probably be asking the point of this thread too.

[Ivo Shandor]

Hiya guys, does this thread serve any different purpose

Nope.

[Sharky58]

Thanks for your options guys. I didnt think there was one topic made here so I made one of my own.

There will be no remake of Back to the Future movies. or if it was ever going to be a BTTF4. Because the rights are owned by the people who made that movie. so until they die the reboot could be on the stages? But I have seen way too many remakes. some are not even worth it. But why do they have to come up and screw up the first movie to begin with on their stupid reboots? Batman may be having more of a reboots than any other. the story changes.

Bill Murray was one of the funny guys. and in the first GB movie most of the stuff was made up by the characters. I read that the scene where the book case fell near the gang on the start. was an accident but they decide to leave it. in GB2 the scene where Dana takes off her shirt and wearing a white bra wasnt scripted.

I loved the GB and GB 2. Dan was working really hard to get GB3 to come on. but it wasnt green lit. He and Harold worked together. then Bill was flirting with the idea that he shoild or shouldnt want to take part. At the End Dan stated that they would do the third movie without Bill. He would have to get permission from Bill to recast him or have him as a ghost. but Dan doubts he would get an approval.

Then Harold died in 2014. Pretty sure they thought the 3rd movie was never going to be made and all the hard work thrown out the window.

Then they sat down and did a reboot which was a ridiculous way.

I would have want to see that movie reguardless how bad it was. Paul could have done a better job. As a matter of fact. I would perfer he stay with the engire GB storyline. If Bill Murray wasnt in it. they could write him off, If Harold died they would have mention that on the film that Egon had passed away.

One guy who played Luis Tully said that he has been retired from acting. so they could have writen him off as well. We did however wanted to see an adult Oscar and he would have joined the team after GB2

GB 2 as I stated had followed closely with the first GB movie.

Having a bust of Harold in an office. Annie Potts, Ernie Hudson, Dan and Bill all show up on GB 2016 playing a different role rather than their famous roles from the first 2 GB movies was pretty sad thing to know a bout. they even had something writen on the Contatment Unit of a gake keeper and key master. which was from Louis and Dana. I do think Paul could have done a much better job.

If he act like GB 1984 didnt exist in the first place and he decide to make his own remake of that movie. he did a nice job screwing it all up but I didnt have the heart to tell him that.

Its crazy. a perfect movie made. then they screw it all up. I wonder how disapointed I will be when I get my hands on the DVD copy. Wouldnt they have their own no ghost logo too?

[JA Slow]

Did this movie do anything? Did it prove women can be Ghostbusters? Did it empower women to go out and take jobs only men do i.e. garbage collectors, coal miners, cab drivers, etc? Did it bring anything revolutionary to the GB formula? Did it make an insane amount of money?

I think all it has done is give us at lease one female GB with a following smaller than Kylie's. It brought back Hi-C Ecto Cooler... briefly. It gave all the remaining GB actors a chance to wink at their fans, making most cringe. The false-feminists introduced the annoying word "GhostBros" for man haters to use against Ghost Heads. It generated the usual round of net fueled hate hype to get people interested in it like a political campaign. Now what?

It didn't reinvent the GB wheel. It was just another unnecessary remake of a celebrated iconic movie that had it's fifteen minutes of shame and now it's dust in the wind.

[JurorNo.2]

Did this movie do anything? Did it prove women can be Ghostbusters? Did it empower women to go out and take jobs only men do i.e. garbage collectors, coal miners, cab drivers, etc?

I'm sure we'll know in a few years when some college professor does a TED talk. No way to know now. But it's certainly not impossible. We don't know yet how today's kids will remember it. Like I said earlier, you guys want to write this movie's legacy in stone after being out a mere two months.

And btw, look up female sanitation workers. They do exist.

It gave all the remaining GB actors a chance to wink at their fans, making most cringe.

Oh? Says who?

[MagicPrime]

Making 'some' cringe, for sure. Bill Murray's cameo made me physically uncomfortable.

[JurorNo.2]

Making 'some' cringe, for sure. Bill Murray's cameo made me physically uncomfortable.

The first part, on the TV, my audiences enjoyed. The second scene wasn't as clever, I agree. Uncomfortable? Like you said, it's a subjective thing. And the rest of the cameos were great. Cringe seems to be the latest Internet buzz word for anything that isn't hip or whatever.

[Sav C]

That would make me cringe-worthy

[MagicPrime]

Making 'some' cringe, for sure. Bill Murray's cameo made me physically uncomfortable.

The first part, on the TV, my audiences enjoyed. The second scene wasn't as clever, I agree. Uncomfortable? Like you said, it's a subjective thing. And the rest of the cameos were great. Cringe seems to be the latest Internet buzz word for anything that isn't hip or whatever.

Nah, cringe is that feeling you get in your brow and jaw when you're embarrassed for someone. When you can feel yourself clinch up a bit, shift in your seat, and the side of your lip gives a little curl to it.

Pretty much my entire experience with watching the movie was jumping from an eyeroll, to a cringe and back again.

[JurorNo.2]

The first part, on the TV, my audiences enjoyed. The second scene wasn't as clever, I agree. Uncomfortable? Like you said, it's a subjective thing. And the rest of the cameos were great. Cringe seems to be the latest Internet buzz word for anything that isn't hip or whatever.

Nah, cringe is that feeling you get in your brow and jaw when you're embarrassed for someone. When you can feel yourself clinch up a bit, shift in your seat, and the side of your lip gives a little curl to it.

Pretty much my entire experience with watching the movie was jumping from an eyeroll, to a cringe and back again.

The cameo didn't play to his strengths. He was ten times more endearing at the Kimmel appearance, loved that (even though that too was labeled cringey on YouTube. Again, buzzword. ).

[Raystantz Italy]

Project announced: wait until some details are made public before judging.

Cast and reboot angle confirmed: wait until we see some pics before judging!

Pics made public: wait until we see a trailer before judging!

Trailer released: wait until you see the whole movie before judging!

Movie is out by two months: you judge it and it's out only by two mere months!!!


I wonder what the next step will be. Wait until a blue ray is released before judging?

[JurorNo.2]

you judge it and it's out only by two mere months!!!

What's going on here isn't merely judging. It's knee jerk condemnation and a demand that that point of view be the final word on the movie.

[Sav C]

Wait until a blue ray is released before judging?

At this rate odds are the Bluray will be out by the time my theater gets it, so yeah, for me that's when I'll most likely judge it.

[MagicPrime]

Project announced: wait until some details are made public before judging.

Cast and reboot angle confirmed: wait until we see some pics before judging!

Pics made public: wait until we see a trailer before judging!

Trailer released: wait until you see the whole movie before judging!

Movie is out by two months: you judge it and it's out only by two mere months!!!


I wonder what the next step will be. Wait until a blue ray is released before judging?

You are present at an unexplained mass goalpost migration.

[Sav C]

You are present at an unexplained mass goalpost migration.

It's a reoccurring phenomenon, the first documented case took place in the NFL end zones (although somehow the CFL was exempt)

[JurorNo.2]

Not to mention a 12 ft. deep River of Slime. At least.

[Sharky58]

To whoever said that women cannot handle a job that a man can do. Think again. I have seen female taxi drivers, truck drivers, construction, police, fire, emt, so on and so on. Wadda think women are breed to stay home and raise the kids? or do light duty work such as office work where they sit there looking pretty? lets not be sexist here. I bet there were some women wrestlers, and no i am not talking about WWE or so forth. Or women as football playerss but they didnt make it to NFL. Women can do anything. I wasnt aware of GhostBros or other things like that.

Yeah women did try out for Nascar. and there is one racing for Stewart-Haas. may I say more?

So back on topic.

[Sharky58]

Now that I am here. I decide to post the email I sent Paul. Keep in mind that I never said to him that his remake is just as screwed up as one can say. But I just dont have the heart to do that. Instead I said he did a good job. BUT. I felt he could do better. I am just staying with the storyline. These remakes or reboots just screw everything up as we all know it. Well we can name a few movies that can use a remake. such as Masters of the Universe.

So I have copy my email to Paul and I am posting it here. No I didnt get his response. If I did I would have posted it here. So here it is...



From Sharky:
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2016 12:43:42 PM
To: paul@feigcoent.com
Subject: Ghostbusters 2016 movie.

Hi Paul.

First I wanted to let you know what I am a huge Ghostbusters fan. I loved the movies so much. reguardless if the cast is different from the Ghostbusters 1984 and Ghostbusters 1989 films I havent seen the latest one. as I am waiting for it to go on DVD so I can watch it with closed captioning.

While I have read about the movie online and seen some youtube videos. I ignore the negative reviews. Because I would love this movie like I did with the first 2. I cant wait to get my copy of the DVD or Blu-Ray copies so I can enjoy.

In my option. the movie doesnt have to be a remake. It could still fit for a Ghostbusters 3. I mean. It has been 27 years since the events of Ghostbusters 2 took place. Ghostbusters 2 was set 5 years after Ghostbusters.

It would make perfect sense if all female scientists came up on their own. got into their own business and went on catching ghosts on their own. Without Ray Stantz, Peter Venkman, Winston Zeddemore, and Egon Spengler.

I used to follow up with the Ghostbusters 3. reading it all in Wikipedia. Dan and Harold were working on that for a long time. Bill wasn't interested in the 3rd movie. But has been flirting with the fact he should do it. Dan even said that they would go without Bill. When Harold passed away, I thought it was all gone. until you came along.

Dan used to say that his character Ray is blind in one eye and had a bad knee, Harold's character was too large to fit in the harness of the pack. Bill's character would have been writen off to say, well he went with Dana. maybe they married and moved out of New York?

Rick Moranis who played Louis Tully has stated he retired long ago so maybe he moved out of NY in his returement home somewhere.

Ecto-1A which was actually a upgrade verison of Ecto-1 may have been sold off when the Ghostbusters went out of business sometime after Ghostbusters 2. just like the fire station which is in active use for the New York Hook & Ladder #8. The Ghostbusting gadgets must have been sold at an aution or distoried.

The new Ghostbusters vehicle which was like a different car I could have called it Ecto-1C. while the Ecto-1B was in the 2009 video game. And if the headquarters was on a Chinese Restaurant. that could be why they couldnt use the firehouse because New York bought it and used it for their Fire Department.

As for the Containment Unit which was in the basment of the old Ghostbusters Headquarters, it could have been tampered with if the new headquarters has their own containment unit. Maybe it was moved? and some of the old ghost escaped which could explain why the new team has to deal with them. I think I see you made new ghosts. which would have been awesome to see.

So maybe when you could get some of the people that used to be in the first 2 movies to show up on this movie or the next you could have them hold their roles. Say like Ray would have retired and was a taxi driver or something. Janine Melnitz could be a secretary in a law firm or something like that, Winston could be either retired or doing something else in New York, Peter and Dana, got married. We should see what Oscar would have been now. I think, according to Ghostbusters 2 Louis Tully and Janine had a love interest. Maybe it was just a lust for each other? Don't think they got married so maybe they were just on their seperate ways.

This idea may not be possible to have these other guys show up on the movie again. Not that they should play in it. but more like they retired from the Ghostbusters and let the new team do the work as they seem to do just fine on this one already made.

But you and other people can call it a remake. I thought it would be in between a remake and a 3rd film. The way I came up with this idea may have been because I loved the movies and cartoons so much.

I really can't wait to see the movie. I also have been looking at buying the 1:64 diecast of Ecto 1, Ecto 1A. the newer Ecto 1 and the motorcycle Ecto 2. This will be fun.

I would love the movie no matter the people that act in it. There are new ghosts. I don't think the guys came accross the ghost in the library again. on the reviews it looks as if the ghostbusters got slimmed by that ghost. Very interesting.

I hope this email goes though and that I let you know you did a good job with what you did. Hopefully I will hear from you sometime.

Take care.

Sharky

I only changed my name to protect myself here. Yes this is the email address I used for Paul. I googled it and found it as Paul himself was replying to someone from Sony. His point of view is that he wanted to tell the story that was never told before. Didnt think it worked didnt it?

I remember reading somethere that when the studio asked Dan how much would it cost to make the 3rd film. He gave them like say $100 million? Even with CGI. which would make it cheaper? Well the studio balked on that. Strange. when Ghostbusters 2016 was out it was worth more. Probably $150 million? I could be wrong about the numbers though. But. I did know the 2016 cost more. if they canceled it I bet they would do the 3rd film. Well anyways. Its all on the net.

I will stop here.

[Alphagaia]

you judge it and it's out only by two mere months!!!

What's going on here isn't merely judging. It's knee jerk condemnation and a demand that that point of view be the final word on the movie.

Yeah, the problem here is not people are not allowed to dislike the movie. Now that's it's out you can form the best opinion of it and it still has a positive reviews dispite of a lot of people giving it a 0,5 on principle before it even was out.

What some people are doing now however, is condemning the movie altogether, as if it already clear it won't have a following or a follow up, and that's what Juror is pointing out here.

It seems people are very hasty to jump to conclusions that fit their world of view just because the movie did not do a home run.

[Commander_Jim]

I can only go off my own social connections, work, family, friends, social media etc which I know isn't representative of the wider world, but I never once spoke to anyone who had anything good to say about it. This board is probably the only place I've seen anyone say anything positive about it and it's not exactly an impartial place for discussion on GB movie.

I just don't see it being anything more than an awkward footnote in GB history in a few years, like the Rococop or Total Recall remakes. And thats the issue really, that it was just a remake. If it was an original story it'd have a better chance of getting a following but remakes always tend to vanish pretty quickly from the scene. Especially one like this one its it's constant references to the original film every five seconds. That's not going to help it stand on its own.

[Alphagaia]

I can only go off my own social connections, work, family, friends, social media etc which I know isn't representative of the wider world, but I never once spoke to anyone who had anything good to say about it. This board is probably the only place I've seen anyone say anything positive about it and it's not exactly an impartial place for discussion on GB movie.

I have the exact opposite experience when I talk to people who have seen it, but that's normal as our social bubbles attract likeminded people. Though I have seen plenty of people on other sites giving the movie a positive review, and I heard proton charging is very positive about it as well? I have not visited that site yet.
At least we can both say a bunch of people went to check it out, or are you just getting opinions from people who watched the trailer and such?

[Webster]

I can only go off my own social connections, work, family, friends, social media etc which I know isn't representative of the wider world, but I never once spoke to anyone who had anything good to say about it. This board is probably the only place I've seen anyone say anything positive about it and it's not exactly an impartial place for discussion on GB movie.

I have the exact opposite experience when I talk to people who have seen it, but that's normal as our social bubbles attract likeminded people. Though I have seen plenty of people on other sites giving the movie a positive review, and I heard proton charging is very positive about it as well? I have not visited that site yet.
At least we can both say a bunch of people went to check it out, or are you just getting opinions from people who watched the trailer and such?

I've had the same experience as Alphagaia tbh. Everyone I've been to see it with or know personally who have seen it has really enjoyed it - yeah not the greatest film but a lot of fun. The 3 times I watched it at the cinema the audience seemed to really enjoy it as well, with a lot of laughs and good comments from people as they left (Yeah I like to listen to what others say at the end of movies ).

There was a lot about the movie I didn't like, ranging from an eyeroll and a groan to full on wish it hadn't been there. Personally whilst it was my kind of humour, a good deal of the jokes were either dragged out or overplayed which was a shame but not a movie breaker for me. The extended Murray cameo felt a bit pointless and overly reckless and bore no relevance to the story, so I get the impression it was stitched in later for Bill to have more screen time. The Ozzy cameo should never have been included and I have no idea what the point of it was at all (I'm actually kind of getting sick of the same Ozzy 'flashback' joke being played out in general).

Overall I really liked the film, even with its flaws. I've seen much MUCH worse movies than this so I don't think it's earnt the repuration it seems to have gotten, but then everyone will have different preferences. I've been a female nerd my whole life and had to accept very very early on that very few people are going to like what I like so being in the minority for me is nothing new. The film helped me learn new things about the fanbase and discover a whole new community I had no idea existed. It has given me the oppurtunity to cosplay as a character I acutally like, rather than having to chose someone I'm not really keen on simply because of their gender. It's also meant that my friends an I can all cosplay together as actual characters

I respect that this is not the film most people wanted, and it's a genuine shame that the controvosy that has surrounded it has meant that fans have been lumped into set groups based soley on if they liked or disliked it regardless of their reasons why.

[RichardLess]

I've said this on other threads but what really bothered me about the movie was the lack of top tier talent involved behind the scenes. Both previous GB movies had some of the best people available working behind the scene. Everything about GB 2016 was generic. The cinematography, set design, CGI and music were all bland and forgetable. Where were the today's equivalent of Elmer Bernstein, Michael Chapman, Bo Welch, John De Cuir, Dennis Murren, Lazlo Kovac? Those guys are the best of the best! Academy Award winners, all them. Imagine a Michael Giachinno score or Howard Shore? Some Rick Carter or Richard Heinrich production design? Some Roger Deakins, Robert Richardson or Dariuz Wolski cinematography? Any of those names behind the scenes and we'd be looking at one beautiful Ghostbusters film. The first two DO look beautiful. Especially when you consider the schedule they were made on. It's insane. I don't think Paul Feig is a very competent director. He's very basic and has framing/shot composition problems. Now he hasn't worked on this type of film before but I would have LOVED someone like Gore Verbinksi(who Seth Rogen recommended to Amy Pascal in the Sony email leaks as a possible GB director candidate. Good call Seth!) or even Edgar Wright.

To those like me who didn't like the movie, will you be giving the Extended Cut a chance? I will. You never know, right? Perhaps I'll see the movie in a new light. HA! It's more likely Sony will apologize for this mess of a film than my opinion changing. I'll still buy the extended cut. It's my duty as a fan to support the franchise, even though I hated the movie. Part of the problem with the reboots failure is that Sony might think Ghostbusters isn't a viable franchise, when in reality they just made the wrong choices for that particular film. I bought a copy of the 2009 video game for every console even though I don't own an Xbox. Yep. That's me. I thought the cartoony Wii version was the best version, granted I'm not much of a gamer. Only reason I own a PS3 is for the Blu Ray. But I digress...

[Webster]

Part of the problem with the reboots failure is that Sony might think Ghostbusters isn't a viable franchise, when in reality they just made the wrong choices for that particular film.

I've been worried about this too. I guess I'd rather support a bad movie that allows for future growth of the franchise than watch it get kicked to the curb I guess it's all about finding the right level of balance right? Show enough support to show there is still a market for more GB stuff, but also convey that there needs to be some changes to get it right.

[Ivo Shandor]

The Ozzy Osbourne cameo was indeed cringe-worthy and has the smell of studio execs all over it.