Discuss the Ghostbusters movie that was released in 2016.
#4894508
910dohead wrote:when the same thing basically applies to the props that we all make.
That isn't really an equitable comparison. Sony isn't losing money with us producing replicas of the props, as with the exception of the Matty replicas and Anavos projects, there isn't an official product that the fan props undercut. Posting a bootleg copy of the film online, even an edited one, is less people who could be buying the DVD or Bluray of the film.

Sony up until has been happy to turn a blind-ish eye to the activities of the prop replica builders and costumers, they have even encouraged it by agreeing to PR events like the fan screening of the reboot last year, because it's free publicity.

I'm not as willing to believe they would turn a blind eye. Would they sue? Who knows, but either way, building prop replicas and posting a modified version of the film online aren't the same kettle of fish.

I'll make some enquiries with AJ, but I suspect we'll be sticking with the position not to post links to the fan edit here.
GBPaulRivera, deadderek liked this
#4894512
Kingpin wrote:
910dohead wrote:when the same thing basically applies to the props that we all make.
That isn't really an equitable comparison. Sony isn't losing money with us producing replicas of the props, as with the exception of the Matty replicas and Anavos projects, there isn't an official product that the fan props undercut. Posting a bootleg copy of the film online, even an edited one, is less people who could be buying the DVD or Bluray of the film.

Sony up until has been happy to turn a blind-ish eye to the activities of the prop replica builders and costumers, they have even encouraged it by agreeing to PR events like the fan screening of the reboot last year, because it's free publicity.

I'm not as willing to believe they would turn a blind eye. Would they sue? Who knows, but either way, building prop replicas and posting a modified version of the film online aren't the same kettle of fish.

I'll make some enquiries with AJ, but I suspect we'll be sticking with the position not to post links to the fan edit here.
Most of the general movie buying audience won't even know where to look for a fan copy let alone download it. Fan cuts don't appeal to anyone but the hardcore fan. One fan cut isn't going to even put a dent in Sony's digital sales for the film. The general public wants the full film. If Star Wars fails to do it to Disney (believe me there are some amazing fan cuts out there), Ghostbusters isn't going to do any better. Even with all the hatred the film received it still didn't hurt digital media sales of the film. It did quite well when it was released. I think a lot of purveyors of the hatred are secretly in the closet when it comes down to admitting they like the movie. I think a lot of haters actually bought copies of the film. If they downloaded it, they downloaded the entire film and not a fan cut.

Anyways, I never said we should post a link to it. He has every right to post it elsewhere and tell us to go find it.

Yeah, I admit that comparing the props to the films are different, but it's apples to oranges. We as fans don't own the rights to meddle with either. I was simply pointing out making money off the props is deemed fine but making a fan cut of one of the films while not making money is highly looked down upon. I know there is a difference, I am just pointing out some of the hypocrisy that we as fans are guilty of committing.
#4894516
Its like fan films. Look at the Paramount Star Trek situation that caused a stir recently. Paramount has always turned a blind eye to Star Trek fan films until recently when one group stepped over the line and made a kickstarter to fund one that made over a million dollars. When fan films are being made with sums of money like that being involved than clearly the line between what is an amateur fan film and what is a copyright infringing production is blurred, and it prompted Paramount to take the creators to court and to create guidelines for what is acceptable for a fan film.

What it comes down to is things like props, fan films, fan edits, fan fiction etc are all accepted parts of any fandom and the copyrights holders are generally fine with it until people cross certain lines, like making money or posting movies publicly.

For anyone interested, this is Paramounts guidelines to fan films:
http://www.startrek.com/fan-films
Sav C liked this
#4894569
JurorNo.2 wrote:Ohhhh ok, I get you now. That is a good question. Well it's like that unflattering Red Letter Media review on GB2 that was posted awhile back. They were so nasty and over the top in their critiques of GB2. And then they'd be so worshiping of GB84, to the point where you were tired of hearing about GB84, lol. But like I said, you get over that eventually and just enjoy a movie on your own terms.
Do you post only on Reddit or do you get all this hate from other forums?
Sav C wrote:As someone who prefers the effects in the originals, I'm starting to think that it has just as much to do with how they were used as it does with their aesthetic.
I agree, too much shakey cam.
DarkSpectre wrote:Well.....Using the extended cut....

cut out the crowd selfie
Yep, sold already! :mrgreen:
DarkSpectre wrote:I'm sure I'll get flack from some here for editing the film but I've watched my cut more than the original cut of the reboot.
If anything you're trying to make something good out of something you dislike plus the edits you made read like they make the film more watchable.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Eh, sure. I mean I'm getting the usual haters yelling at me (not you), I've got reboot fans yelling at me for not completely siding with them. This is all nonsense and I'm far too old for this, lol.
I feel that way on the TMNT Technodrome forum as well when I post there. It's the b****y Spanish Inquisition there! :roll:
#4894615
Lee FW wrote:I think it certainly changed the attitude of merchandisers and the money they can make from it!

2 years ago I remember someone saying "I would've liked to have got you something Ghostbusters for your birthday but there isn't anything" Fast forward to now "There's too much Ghostbusters to choose from!"
Exactly, I do wish more people could see it from that perspective. :)
#4894616
The problem with rebooting an original film is that you have to consider both audiences from old and new ones. You have to introduce something fresh to potential fans and at the same time please the old fans that sometimes nostalgia-driven. It's the same with game remakes where they give you the original concept or plot but at the same time offering you new features that are sometimes unnecessary or overwhelming.
#4894648
deadderek wrote:
RichardLess wrote:
It sure would. Read the fair use guidelines. This easily falls into educational. Easily. So long as he/she does not charge a fee, it is perfectly legal. He could even claim parody if he wanted too. A fan cut, so long as you aren't profiting from it, is 1000% legal. Steven Soderburgh releases fan cuts from copyrighted works & uses fair use. Topher Grace did a fan cut of the Star Wars movies. Just don't profit from it.
How would that fall under parody? How would it be educational?

*update* 910dohead can dislike this post all they want, but it's still true.
#4894656
deadderek wrote:
RichardLess wrote:
Well my sister is a lawyer but then again, I'm Canadian. I work at a movie studio, in development, and when bringing this up to legal, they laughed. Take that however you will. Here's what I know: fair use is a thing. This sites copyright stance notwithstanding, fan edits are in a grey area of copyright. If you profit from it, you're toast. If you cite fair use properly, you're fine. If you get sent a take down notice, don't ignore it. That's it.

I just want to state for the record: piracy is wrong and one should not engage in piracy. Illegal downloading of movies and the like have seriously harmed the film industry and has cost hundreds, if not thousands, their jobs. It single handedly bled the DVD market as a revenue stream. So please do not take my stance of this fan edit as a endorsement for piracy. Fan edits are a creative endeavour that comes from a place of creative expression rather than doing harm to an industry. It is a generally a harmless act that comes from a place of love.
So did your sister give a legal opinion on this?

Also you brought it up to your legal dept, and you claimed they laughed and to " Take that however you will.".

You're implying that a legal department and/or your sister are giving their blessing to posting copyrighted material (sans some scenes or not) on the internet.

Yes there are exceptions that fall under fair use, but as Kingpin said a nearly full length movie barely a year old is NOT under fair use.

Fan edits do NOT fall in a legal grey area.

Regardless of if it's something you make a profit on or not, UPLOADING A NEARLY FULL LENGTH movie (even with a couple scenes redacted) is NOT fair use.

I CANNOT stress this enough.

Also you say "If you get sent a take down notice, don't ignore it. That's it. "

A take down notice is sent because you are doing something ILLEGAL and have been given legal notice to remove it.

There's a difference between a company turning a blind eye, and condoning intellectual property violations.

I assure you go ahead and tell a court of law "Well SO AND SO does it and they don't get in trouble." That just doesn't fly.

Also while it's nice you're saying you're anti-piracy, posting the movie (edited or not) is PIRACY. An edit that simply removes scenes is not parody in ANY way nor educational.

Another User on the site summed this up nicely as well:
Image
There is so much mis information in that post that I don't even know where to begin. A) no my sister does not work in copyright law, she's a tax lawyer and I did not ask her opinion.
Getting a take down notice does not mean you are doing something illegal. Perhaps doing some research before making a statement like that might be in order? Because there are literally thousands of YouTube channels that operate under fair use and they get take down notices constantly. Here's a recent example: someone representing John Williams took down a Auralnauts video with the title "Star Wars Minus Williams". The video had no John Williams music in it and they recieved a take down notice. Now are there justified take down notices? Of course there are. But! These major companies have bots that search around and find content which triggers certain protocol's. One of those is a take down notice. Oftentimes those videos are operating within the parameters of fair use.
Also "So and so does it and got away with it" is totally a legal defence. It's called legal precedent & is used all the time.

Anyways, this all doesn't matter. The person who made the fan edit is not comfortable with putting it up and I totally understand that position. It's always better to be safe than to be sorry. That's the end of it. I'm sure someone will make a similar fan edit at some point and make it available. Until then we will have to suffer with the version made by the filmmakers(or not watch it).
#4894670
RichardLess wrote: ... So my question is, has the reboot made you appreciate/ re-examine the original films in ways you perhaps didn't expect? Have you noticed others doing the same thing?
I actually took up the challenge myself yesterday. You make some valid points, and I wanted to respond to you first before getting into what others have said. I had gotten the original Ghostbusters when I still watched Sesame Street, Thomas the Tank Engine, Mr. Roger's Neighborhood, and so on. I was exposed to sci-fi, horror, action, comedy, and drama that were suited for teens and adults. Ranging from the 30s to the 90s. Ghostbusters has been my all time favorite movie and a part of my childhood even though I was born long after its heyday. I would show it to friends, made Halloween decorations with the logo, I drew and wrote stories, as I do today, and when I found the internet, I watched all the episodes of the cartoons on Youtube, went on these cool fan sites, and watched fan-films. When the video game was announced, I was hyped beyond belief and I bought a PS3 for it. The IDW comics only elevated that hype even further because the guys were back and drawn by my favorite artist I knew from deviantART. My uncle even got the Kenner RGB toys from eBay and I had so much fun with the firehouse, ecto-1, the Ghostbusters, and various ghost toys. However, there was a point when all of this positive energy would go sour. A few years back I met someone who would be my first love, and it lasted for a long time, but due to a fall out that lead to betrayal and heartache, I was left devastated and only my Faith in God could pull me out from a depressive suicidal state the person left me in. For all intensive purposes, the flame for Ghostbusters and other passionate stuff I grew up on was dead, and prior to yesterday, the last time I saw the movie as a whole was probably back in 2014. It took a long time for me to erase this person from these things I loved.

Suddenly the reboot was coming and I began to get excited for Ghostbusters again, even though the reaction from the fandom to it shocked me because, while I'm sure these people had this same passion I did or bigger than my own, its incredible how they went the route of say bigots. Not the people who disliked it, but those who hated it with fury to hate the artists involved, and anyone who didn't agree to them at a level associated with say ... Satan? Just pure hate for a movie, when in my head, a movie is a movie, and making it your idol, your religion, your god ... it leads to stuff like that. Of course, I love it too, but not enough to simply hate on anyone. I've defended people from both sides who were attacked, and gotten called names for simply trying to be the level headed person ... but with all this going on, the reboot's coming reignited desire to be a part of Ghostbusters again. The Ghostheads documentary helped in that too. So I go to see this movie at a screening the night before its release, and I loved it. There are multiple reasons why, one was because this was my first time getting to see Ghostbusters in theaters and another was the chemistry. The main cast were fun and funny and their characters had the same same spirit of comradery familiar to the the original was here too, even if the story wasn't perfect or extra special beyond the relationships and battle scenes. Heck, it's the only movie I've gone back to see in theaters. In the year since it came out, I've gotten to watch most of RGB again on Netflix, and I can safely say that I am again in love with this franchise.

I saw this post and I wondered if the reboot made me appreciate the film even more? To test this out, I saw the original again, and yet somehow it has also made me appreciate the reboot even more then when I saw it in theaters and on Cable. You see, the thing is, the original to me was what for many kids is their childhood love for film. It showed us the power of film and art and imagination fueled by passion and care. The reboot, while coming off as a well intention film that loves the originals, it was too afraid to take on the continuation of this series. The reboot made me see things like how important subtlety and a slower pace is to a story. I began to see the faces and body movements of the actors in reaction to something silly. Take for instance when Peter reminds Egon of the drill in the head experiment, Egon tells him it would of worked if Peter didn't intervene, but look at Ray for a second and you'll see Dan give the reaction most would give. Either the character was giving a "Wait, you tried to do what?! Why?" or "What the f*** were you thinking?" Although the Blu-Ray ruined certain effects shots that I heard the 4K fixed on, I was still amazed by so many things going on. Even simple shots like the outside of the firehouse at night with the logo glowing brightly in the city street is a great shot. The map paintings were really great and the cloud flowing over the building effects during the third act were just ... HOW DID THEY DO THAT?! Like, don't get me wrong, the new film has great visual effects, and for the most part there is a grounded state to them compared to most CGI oriented effects in films these days. The ghosts to me have the Ghostbusters flavor like the Librarian and Dream Ghost, people in costumes and lighting as well as puppets on set to help people in the CGI room. However, the flavor of that 70s/80s smokey feeling to the physical film itself really adds to the glow and translucent touch of the Ghost effects. The Bernstein score was also very much an eye opener at certain points because you really get into the comedy and romance and suspense of it all. I think out of anything, I definitely appreciate the montage most. The montage gives that sense of time passing and honestly, that is the point where they do become the rockstars we wish to be, that montage is why I want to be a Ghostbuster. Driving around town, busting ghosts, saving people, being celebrities. They're getting popular as more calls come in, and it gives a greater sense that the city needs them even more at the turn up of a destructive god. If the reboot had this, although it would of been another thing taken from the original, it could of helped the story and make sense of scenes like Rowan growling in the diner, drawing the demonic logo, while seeing the Ghostbusters on TV and the first meeting between them. Let's be honest too, unlike other 80s movies, the montage in this film is not a joke like modern comedies treat them as such because it adds to the story a sense of growth and time and character growth. The animation for the proton streams were greater in my opinion, and I appreciated the finale for being a slower, but still chaotic in the sense that everything they do only escalates. However, it made me appreciate the pay off of Erin and Abby's reuniting at the end because not only was the world saved, but so was a broken relationship which means a lot to me as I too have made peace with the one who hurt me and moved on. In the end though, isn't the message of Ghostbusters about the idea that no matter what monsters we make in the world, real or fictional, if we have the talents and right tools and work together, we can overcome most obstacles?

Boy was this a long answer, but basically I had to lay out my soul to make a point. Seeing it again was wonderful and I'll likely see it more often than before, but not enough to desensatize it and the sequel and reboot. Thanks for making this topic as it was what got me to see it again yesterday. Also, I never laughed so hard watching it until yesterday.
Last edited by GBPaulRivera on June 14th, 2017, 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sav C, JurorNo.2, Styrofoam_Guy and 2 others liked this
#4894675
DarkSpectre wrote:Basically that was my intent when I made my edit, Paul. was to give the reboot the flavor of the original. I actually have come around more so to the 2016 crew because of it.
I'm glad you found a way to like them. Honestly, in the fan-fiction I've written, I've tried to make sure that the dialogue has that nice blend of the dry and slower subtle pace of the original, and the fast and swift blunt humor from the new one that worked for me. I think that's what hurt the new film too because ... Paul and Ivan had different ideas to letting the actors improvise. To me, I think the improve in GB 84 was the facial expressions and lines you know weren't in the original script, but added on from Harold or Danny or Bill. Whereas Paul's is simply let the camera roll and see how far we can make it go. I mean, I like that too because it's the same as just giving a group of kids some lego and see what they can build. The interview, although a bit too long, had me in tears, but that's because it had wit similar to the original of just reacting to one weird point after another. Like, how about when Peter says to Dana: "Oh that's what we get here, day in and day out around this place." Janine just looks at him with the face we'd all have, along the lines of "you lying bastard." Either way, I love both movies, but I'm happy I discovered the original early on in life and grew up to see a new movie in theaters.
Sav C, JurorNo.2, Alphagaia liked this
#4894685
GBPaulRivera wrote:A few years back I met someone who would be my first love, and it lasted for a long time, but due to a fall out that lead to betrayal and heartache, I was left devastated and only my Faith in God could pull me out from a depressive suicidal state the person left me in. For all intensive purposes, the flame for Ghostbusters and other passionate stuff I grew up on was dead, and prior to yesterday, the last time I saw the movie as a whole was probably back in 2014. It took a long time for me to erase this person from these things I loved.
I'm so sorry, I had much the same experience with a life long friend/love recently. And yes, there were a lot of movies etc. I couldn't enjoy again after that. Everything reminds you of them. Ironically, he was one of those fans who didn't want to see the reboot, mainly because Hitchens was his idol and "women aren't funny," as he recited to me. :sigh:
The main cast were fun and funny and their characters had the same same spirit of comradery familiar to the the original was here too, even if the story wasn't perfect or extra special beyond the relationships and battle scenes.
Exactly!
Take for instance when Peter reminds Egon of the drill in the head experiment, Egon tells him it would of worked if Peter didn't intervene, but look at Ray for a second and you'll see Dan give the reaction most would give. Either the character was giving a "Wait, you tried to do what?! Why?" or "What the f*** were you thinking?"
Great observation! Also when Egon says, "This is big, Peter," Ray looks at Peter like "See I told you," lol.
However, it made me appreciate the pay off of Erin and Abby's reuniting at the end because not only was the world saved, but so was a broken relationship which means a lot to me as I too have made peace with the one who hurt me and moved on.
Along those lines I think is Peter and Ray's relationship, which I feel doesn't get brought up enough. There is some tension there with their priorities in life being so different; I honestly think they could have parted ways eventually like Abby and Erin. But you see that start to turn towards the end, like you say, mostly with glances and reading between the lines ("Nice working with you, Doctor Venkman"). It's more spelled out in ATC, partly because that's just the style of the writing, but also because girls (in general) are more comfortable saying schmaltzy things like "I wasn't going to leave you twice." ;)
GBPaulRivera liked this
#4894695
JurorNo.2 wrote:I'm so sorry, I had much the same experience with a life long friend/love recently. And yes, there were a lot of movies etc. I couldn't enjoy again after that. Everything reminds you of them. Ironically, he was one of those fans who didn't want to see the reboot, mainly because Hitchens was his idol and "women aren't funny," as he recited to me. :sigh:
Thank you. Honestly, I wish I didn't make our connection based on fan stuff as it did hurt me a lot. Anyways, I'm sorry to hear it doesn't just happen to me. I hope you're better since.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Great observation! Also when Egon says, "This is big, Peter," Ray looks at Peter like "See I told you," lol.
Good point, I didn't notice that, but again subtly works to the benefit of the original.
JurorNo.2 wrote:Along those lines I think is Peter and Ray's relationship, which I feel doesn't get brought up enough. There is some tension there with their priorities in life being so different; I honestly think they could have parted ways eventually like Abby and Erin. But you see that start to turn towards the end, like you say, mostly with glances and reading between the lines ("Nice working with you, Doctor Venkman"). It's more spelled out in ATC, partly because that's just the style of the writing, but also because girls (in general) are more comfortable saying schmaltzy things like "I wasn't going to leave you twice." ;)
This is quite the coincidence because when I saw that scene a few weeks back, I honestly saw this in my head:
If let's say this was in the original GB 3, and I thought well what if what happened to Abby happened to Ray. I immediately see Peter running in like Erin, even in their old age. Heck, Winston too if he was with Peter on that plan. :)
JurorNo.2 liked this
#4894715
RichardLess wrote:
deadderek wrote:
So did your sister give a legal opinion on this?

Also you brought it up to your legal dept, and you claimed they laughed and to " Take that however you will.".

You're implying that a legal department and/or your sister are giving their blessing to posting copyrighted material (sans some scenes or not) on the internet.

Yes there are exceptions that fall under fair use, but as Kingpin said a nearly full length movie barely a year old is NOT under fair use.

Fan edits do NOT fall in a legal grey area.

Regardless of if it's something you make a profit on or not, UPLOADING A NEARLY FULL LENGTH movie (even with a couple scenes redacted) is NOT fair use.

I CANNOT stress this enough.

Also you say "If you get sent a take down notice, don't ignore it. That's it. "

A take down notice is sent because you are doing something ILLEGAL and have been given legal notice to remove it.

There's a difference between a company turning a blind eye, and condoning intellectual property violations.

I assure you go ahead and tell a court of law "Well SO AND SO does it and they don't get in trouble." That just doesn't fly.

Also while it's nice you're saying you're anti-piracy, posting the movie (edited or not) is PIRACY. An edit that simply removes scenes is not parody in ANY way nor educational.

Another User on the site summed this up nicely as well:
Image
There is so much mis information in that post that I don't even know where to begin. A) no my sister does not work in copyright law, she's a tax lawyer and I did not ask her opinion.
Getting a take down notice does not mean you are doing something illegal. Perhaps doing some research before making a statement like that might be in order? Because there are literally thousands of YouTube channels that operate under fair use and they get take down notices constantly. Here's a recent example: someone representing John Williams took down a Auralnauts video with the title "Star Wars Minus Williams". The video had no John Williams music in it and they recieved a take down notice. Now are there justified take down notices? Of course there are. But! These major companies have bots that search around and find content which triggers certain protocol's. One of those is a take down notice. Oftentimes those videos are operating within the parameters of fair use.
Also "So and so does it and got away with it" is totally a legal defence. It's called legal precedent & is used all the time.

Anyways, this all doesn't matter. The person who made the fan edit is not comfortable with putting it up and I totally understand that position. It's always better to be safe than to be sorry. That's the end of it. I'm sure someone will make a similar fan edit at some point and make it available. Until then we will have to suffer with the version made by the filmmakers(or not watch it).

I'm simply stating that posting a nearly full copy of a movie barely a year old even sans a few scenes does NOT fall under fair use.
Kingpin, Alphagaia, Sav C liked this
#4894731
Fan edits can be discussed, but note that technically it not fair use and is copyright infringement. Sharing them should only be done privately. Obviously Sony isn't missing out if it is just shared with diehard fans that have already purchased copies of the movie for example, but any widespread distribution is damaging and direct links should not be shared.
GBPaulRivera, deadderek liked this
#4894732
GBPaulRivera wrote:Thank you. Honestly, I wish I didn't make our connection based on fan stuff as it did hurt me a lot. Anyways, I'm sorry to hear it doesn't just happen to me. I hope you're better since.
Thanks, you too! Lol, I actually had a dream about this last night. It's happened before, my friend comes back and part of me is happy, but then there's that nagging feeling that nothing has change, and I'm just repeating the same old cycle. I guess it's the brain's way of trying to work things out.
This is quite the coincidence because when I saw that scene a few weeks back, I honestly saw this in my head:
If let's say this was in the original GB 3, and I thought well what if what happened to Abby happened to Ray. I immediately see Peter running in like Erin, even in their old age. Heck, Winston too if he was with Peter on that plan. :)
Yeah, Peter's a good guy deep down. I mean Ray made a rather large mistake with Stay Puft, lol, and Peter could have easily taken the opportunity to say, "Oh and I'm the one who doesn't take life seriously, Mr. You Never Studied?" ;) But instead Ray just gets an affectionate slap on the face. :cool:
GBPaulRivera liked this
#4894746
AJ Quick wrote:Fan edits can be discussed, but note that technically it not fair use and is copyright infringement. Sharing them should only be done privately. Obviously Sony isn't missing out if it is just shared with diehard fans that have already purchased copies of the movie for example, but any widespread distribution is damaging and direct links should not be shared.
I have to agree with you on this strange discussion about fan edits. Personally, I can see why people think: "Oh we're not selling anything and we would simply be distributing a version of the film that no one at SONY (possibly) made." which isn't what I'm seeing persae, but the gist of this debate or topic is generally about whether releasing it will be a positive or negative experience to the fan who made this edited version

I'll give an example where I've seen/listened to a fan-edit which still called for a cease and desist. I'm subscribed to a youtuber, SWG. He's a musician who is mostly popular for his fan edits of Michael Jackson songs, where he remixes them into extended formats or compilations that are rather unique because he takes the original multitracks and either combines them in ways so certain elements get a spotlight or the ones that do are positioned somewhere else, while still in tune of the song's purpose. Now I'm sure there is a great difference between fan edits of a film and fan edits of a song, but the point is the same: A fan has reformated the original content to create a version that did not exist until now. He's made any of his videos and audio tracks on other sites because although he does it for free, on the side, no ad revenue for monetization, it's still all for fun. Yet, they've been taken down. After all, they're still the property of SONY/EPIC/Triumph International, Inc (the MJ company). Sure, he's gotten them back on or he's kept them in a dropbox or some cloud site where he is allowed to download them, but at that point, it's private to private sharing likely for die hard fans of his stuff.

From what I've seen, AJ and Kingpin and others are just saying that it's better to be safe then sorry to distribute a fan edit publicly. Yes, Sony has turn a blind eye to a lot of fan stuff and there are two reasons why I think they do so. One, projects is not only free advertisement to a film that without the fan base, would only be an artifact in a museum, and Two, I imagine it is also something good to see that their property makes people happy. Could you defy them? Yeah, but for a fan edit? I don't think so. In the end, I'd like to see this fanedit someday, but its one of those things us fans have to accept never seeing the light of day on a wide scale ... like many fan-films. *cough cough*
Last edited by GBPaulRivera on June 18th, 2017, 3:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
deadderek liked this
#4894747
JurorNo.2 wrote:Thanks, you too! Lol, I actually had a dream about this last night. It's happened before, my friend comes back and part of me is happy, but then there's that nagging feeling that nothing has change, and I'm just repeating the same old cycle. I guess it's the brain's way of trying to work things out.
Believe me, I understand, and it hurts still because I have my feelings, but day by day I'm doing my thing and happy that with my faith and my friends and a little love for me has kept me alive.
Yeah, Peter's a good guy deep down. I mean Ray made a rather large mistake with Stay Puft, lol, and Peter could have easily taken the opportunity to say, "Oh and I'm the one who doesn't take life seriously, Mr. You Never Studied?" ;) But instead Ray just gets an affectionate slap on the face. :cool:
Yeah, Peter's a good guy deep down inside, but its his directions and jokes and laziness that gets everyone wanting to rip their hair out.
#4894761
Did the reboot change public perception on the original films? I'm not really sure. AMC just aired Ghostbusters and Ghostbusters 2 , and there is certainly more new merchandise for the original films than the reboot.

It probably changed public perception of the fan base though. What with the immature trolling and one million plus down votes of the trailer and overall douche baggery. You can blame social media for giving those assclowns a platform to perform on.
#4894767
MoonRay wrote:The problem with rebooting an original film is that you have to consider both audiences from old and new ones.
I think the main problem of rebooting a film like Ghostbusters is that it didn't need it. Why would anyone want to reboot Star Wars or The Godfather?
GBPaulRivera wrote:It showed us the power of film and art and imagination fueled by passion and care. The reboot, while coming off as a well intention film that loves the originals, it was too afraid to take on the continuation of this series. The reboot made me see things like how important subtlety and a slower pace is to a story. I began to see the faces and body movements of the actors in reaction to something silly. Take for instance when Peter reminds Egon of the drill in the head experiment, Egon tells him it would of worked if Peter didn't intervene, but look at Ray for a second and you'll see Dan give the reaction most would give.
Your whole post is exactly how I feel although this bit I'm quoting is spot on! :)
JurorNo.2 wrote:he was one of those fans who didn't want to see the reboot, mainly because Hitchens was his idol and "women aren't funny," as he recited to me. :sigh:
He was wrong. Women are funny and I'm not sure why Paul Feig felt he had to prove his insecurity on this (is that what feminism is about?). Women are funny in movies but not in this film and a lot of modern comedies don't serve men or women very well. :wink:
deadderek, 555-2368 liked this
#4894785
pferreira1983 wrote:Why would anyone want to reboot Star Wars or Godfather
I dunno, ask Disney. And spare me the fallacy that those soft reboots are sequels, lol.
He was wrong. Women are funny and I'm not sure why Paul Feig felt he had to prove his insecurity on this
Probably because my friend was sadly far from alone in his thinking.

Btw, user "555-2368," kindly stay off the Dislike button for two seconds. 16 is quite enough for a lifetime.
#4894787
JurorNo.2 wrote:I dunno, ask Disney. And spare me the fallacy that those soft reboots are sequels, lol.
You know there's probably versions of pro-reboot fans on Star Wars The Force Awakens forums. Ha, ha! :lol:
JurorNo.2 wrote:kindly stay off the Dislike button for two seconds. 16 is quite enough for a lifetime.
Has he been disliking a lot of comments? He's given me loads of likes. I'm interested in him posting to hear what he has to say.
555-2368 liked this
#4894790
pferreira1983 wrote:I think the main problem of rebooting a film like Ghostbusters is that it didn't need it. Why would anyone want to reboot Star Wars or The Godfather?
Well let's be honest. Rebooting is film terms for one of the oldest methods of story telling, re-telling. I mean, how many times have people retold classic stories. For example, the simplest is The Three Little Pigs which was retold as The Three Little Wolves and you can imagine the villain was changed from big bad wolf to a pig. I mean, they're simpler compared to trying to re-tell Harry Potter and that's because the structure of the story is hard to re-think it without jeopardizing the original, but there is something in Ghostbusters that can be re-imagined. The Godfather is a great film, but it's based on a book and can be told in a new way. Scarface has been re-told one, better too, but it can do so too. Saying it didn't need to isn't a reason not to as that does limit people on thinking there is a way to re-tell it without losing the message and spirit. The formula to Ghostbusters allows for re-imaginings. It's just that ... in regards to our period of history, making it now and not later and certain choices to make it too familiar and yet too different put it in a middle position for many who enjoyed it or didn't, but had to deal with extreme sides.
pferreira1983 wrote:Your whole post is exactly how I feel although this bit I'm quoting is spot on! :)
Well thank you, and look, I love the new movie to bits. Certain elements like the chemistry, some ghost effects, even the new suits were fun. I think what convinced me the most is still seeing that iconic logo unscratched because that's the symbol utterly captures the point, the ghost character is being kept at bay, but it all looks so funny. Even the blowing it up with the nuked car is an element I appreciated being different, an alternative to crossing the streams. I've started to write short stories about them, but to have dialogue and moments in line with the subtly and development of the original film because that's a flavor it was missing with some of the comedy. Ghostbusters showed me the power of film and art and imagination fueled by passion and care, and Ghostbusters: Answer The Call showed me where it can and can't go, but still offer a good time for those who can see that.
pferreira1983 wrote:He was wrong. Women are funny and I'm not sure why Paul Feig felt he had to prove his insecurity on this (is that what feminism is about?). Women are funny in movies but not in this film and a lot of modern comedies don't serve men or women very well. :wink:
In defense to Paul Fieg, his cast and crew, his team, and himself was being harassed. Oh what? They're supposed to not act as they did. Look, any professional can hold their tongue when it comes to the content, but attack the people and say the film is ruined because of so and so or it isn't the exact thing as the original. I'm sure you didn't because of your point, but I'm saying for those who do.

DETRACT:
Yeah A lot of modern comedies don't serve women or men (I switched it up to be fair, lol ;)) because they're made with the over improvisational, too fast, too raunchy, too much attitude because, and this is my opinion, people are so desensitized and live with a sarcastic view and are too connected to the grueling reality of today's post-9/11 world that you need a lot to make people laugh. We're too politically correct or too politically insensitive and being in the middle isn't enough for audiences, so comedies go for insensitivity and that can go either way. 40 Year Old Virgin, The Hangover, The Heat, and Bridesmaids are modern classics, and they really hits the bars on insensitivity for male and female humor, proving that both have unique perspectives on the same subjects of comedy.
Alphagaia, Sav C liked this
#4894814
GBPaulRivera wrote:
pferreira1983 wrote:I think the main problem of rebooting a film like Ghostbusters is that it didn't need it. Why would anyone want to reboot Star Wars or The Godfather?
Well let's be honest. Rebooting is film terms for one of the oldest methods of story telling, re-telling. I mean, how many times have people retold classic stories. For example, the simplest is The Three Little Pigs which was retold as The Three Little Wolves and you can imagine the villain was changed from big bad wolf to a pig. I mean, they're simpler compared to trying to re-tell Harry Potter and that's because the structure of the story is hard to re-think it without jeopardizing the original, but there is something in Ghostbusters that can be re-imagined. The Godfather is a great film, but it's based on a book and can be told in a new way. Scarface has been re-told one, better too, but it can do so too. Saying it didn't need to isn't a reason not to as that does limit people on thinking there is a way to re-tell it without losing the message and spirit. The formula to Ghostbusters allows for re-imaginings. It's just that ... in regards to our period of history, making it now and not later and certain choices to make it too familiar and yet too different put it in a middle position for many who enjoyed it or didn't, but had to deal with extreme sides.
pferreira1983 wrote:Your whole post is exactly how I feel although this bit I'm quoting is spot on! :)
Well thank you, and look, I love the new movie to bits. Certain elements like the chemistry, some ghost effects, even the new suits were fun. I think what convinced me the most is still seeing that iconic logo unscratched because that's the symbol utterly captures the point, the ghost character is being kept at bay, but it all looks so funny. Even the blowing it up with the nuked car is an element I appreciated being different, an alternative to crossing the streams. I've started to write short stories about them, but to have dialogue and moments in line with the subtly and development of the original film because that's a flavor it was missing with some of the comedy. Ghostbusters showed me the power of film and art and imagination fueled by passion and care, and Ghostbusters: Answer The Call showed me where it can and can't go, but still offer a good time for those who can see that.
pferreira1983 wrote:He was wrong. Women are funny and I'm not sure why Paul Feig felt he had to prove his insecurity on this (is that what feminism is about?). Women are funny in movies but not in this film and a lot of modern comedies don't serve men or women very well. :wink:
In defense to Paul Fieg, his cast and crew, his team, and himself was being harassed. Oh what? They're supposed to not act as they did. Look, any professional can hold their tongue when it comes to the content, but attack the people and say the film is ruined because of so and so or it isn't the exact thing as the original. I'm sure you didn't because of your point, but I'm saying for those who do.

DETRACT:
Yeah A lot of modern comedies don't serve women or men (I switched it up to be fair, lol ;)) because they're made with the over improvisational, too fast, too raunchy, too much attitude because, and this is my opinion, people are so desensitized and live with a sarcastic view and are too connected to the grueling reality of today's post-9/11 world that you need a lot to make people laugh. We're too politically correct or too politically insensitive and being in the middle isn't enough for audiences, so comedies go for insensitivity and that can go either way. 40 Year Old Virgin, The Hangover, The Heat, and Bridesmaids are modern classics, and they really hits the bars on insensitivity for male and female humor, proving that both have unique perspectives on the same subjects of comedy.
The problem isn't just that they reboot one of the most classic comedies ever made, the problem is that it exists instead of GB3. There was zero reason to reboot this franchise. Even the Stark Trek reboot isn't technically a reboot since Abrams and company knew how big of a shit storm that would have caused. And this isn't a retelling of a story, so I don't buy that comparison. This was so far removed from what made Ghostbusters a classic. The easiest part of Ghostbusters is what? The actual Ghostbusting. Anyone can do that. The original films were barely interested in showing the GBs bust ghosts. Was it cool? Yes. But other things were more important. Like characters and comedy.

You know what I just realized? And I guess this says more about me than anything but I would've rather had a terrible GB3 than a good reboot. That's how against reboots of classic films I am. Who knows when we will get something GB related again after the reboot bombed. I think this showed Hollywood not to screw with movies audiences really love. Has Hollywood reboot a film as successful as GB? I'm trying to think but I don't think so.
#4894832
RichardLess wrote:I would've rather had a terrible GB3 than a good reboot.
Personal tastes will vary, but as I've said here before, I'd rather have a good reboot or a poor reboot over a terrible GB3, because even though that may mean it'll be a while before we see another film, it at least means the classic franchise and its characters are untarnished.
#4894849
RichardLess wrote:The problem isn't just that they reboot one of the most classic comedies ever made, the problem is that it exists instead of GB3. There was zero reason to reboot this franchise.
Technically speaking, Ghostbusters 2 didn't have to exist. The original doesn't have to exist, but it does, and we got GB3 in a video game, which since 2009, the platform has been outdoing movies for a lot of times. To say there is zero reason is kinda contradictory to a universe where reasons exist. Does it need to have a reboot? No. But does anything need to be rebooted? Superhero movies, for instance, delight in reboots: Spider-Man, Batman, Superman, Hulk, I could go on forever. Star Trek is in a reboot phase, as you mentioned. The new Star Wars are sequels, but have the hallmarks of reboots. Even James Bond has rebooted itself. Part of the fun is seeing how someone adapts the same concepts into a new story. Or if you want to think about it this way: does anyone need to make yet another film about the life of Jesus? No. But it’s going to keep happening, because people like it. And Hollywood is in the business of making things people will pay to see. Even after HAROLD RAMIS DIED ... people wanted another movie, but at that point were willing to sacrifice a character we deeply loved when it would of reminded us that THIS IS IT. This is THE END of the Ghostbusters we loved growing up. I didn't want that, I'm happy remembering them from the first two movies and video game and comics.
RichardLess wrote:Even the Stark Trek reboot isn't technically a reboot since Abrams and company knew how big of a shit storm that would have caused. And this isn't a retelling of a story, so I don't buy that comparison.
You don't buy it, fine, but it technically is a re-telling. The purpose of a reboot, story wise, not studio, is to return to a property and offer a re-imagining while keeping core elements either visually or plot and characters. Again, the issue with the reboot it is that it went for familiar and different. Sadly that is its faults more than anything, but I still enjoyed it for being different enough.
RichardLess wrote:This was so far removed from what made Ghostbusters a classic. The easiest part of Ghostbusters is what? The actual Ghostbusting. Anyone can do that. The original films were barely interested in showing the GBs bust ghosts. Was it cool? Yes. But other things were more important. Like characters and comedy.
Again, that's just personal taste. For some, they got that too, comedy and characters. I mean, I love the fan-films we've gotten and they suck at CGI and practical effects for the most part, but they have the heart of independent movies and you can overlook the ghost busting or lack of it in some because the story matters most. In this movie, the story mattered. Sadly, the story couldn't be totally fleshed out in 2 hours and 15 minutes, but it gave me what I wanted: A comedy about people catching ghosts.
RichardLess wrote:You know what I just realized? And I guess this says more about me than anything but I would've rather had a terrible GB3 than a good reboot. That's how against reboots of classic films I am. Who knows when we will get something GB related again after the reboot bombed. I think this showed Hollywood not to screw with movies audiences really love. Has Hollywood reboot a film as successful as GB? I'm trying to think but I don't think so.
Kingpin wrote:Personal tastes will vary, but as I've said here before, I'd rather have a good reboot or a poor reboot over a terrible GB3, because even though that may mean it'll be a while before we see another film, it at least means the classic franchise and its characters are untarnished.
I'm with Kingpin on his response. That is quite the devotion, and something I'd mostly associate with say theologians and philosophers and scientists and historians and mathematicians and engineers ... but for Ghostbusters? Again, I respect your point, but getting a bad film that will disappoint harder than a reboot just because it has the originals ... alright then. I've said my peace on that.
Alphagaia, Sav C liked this
#4894926
RichardLess wrote:I would've rather had a terrible GB3 than a good reboot.
Huh, that's an interesting quandary there. I mean, of course, film is subjective, blah blah blah, so the whole "terrible/good" thing is kinda nebulous. But that aside, all things being equal, I'd certainly prefer to see the G1* Ghostbusters crew again in a sequel. Even if a sequel is "terrible," it's still fun seeing the familiar characters in another adventure; seeing what's happened to them over the years, etc. And you don't really lose anything. I mean Godfather 3 is pretty terrible, but it doesn't especially affect my enjoyment of the first two. I know a lot of fans have trouble getting past that, but that's their loss I suppose.

*Btw, yeah, I'm borrowing from the Transformers franchise and calling the first two movies "G1 Ghostbusters" (And RGB can be G2 if you like, etc.). For three reasons:

1. I'm tired of saying "the original." The word "original" is too often synonymous with words like "primitive" or "rudimentary," and those are the last words I'd use to describe Ghostbusters (1984).

2. I'm also tired of saying "the '80s" or "the 1984 version." It reminds me of the fallacy in geek culture that movies didn't exist before they personally were born (Star Wars being the lone, tired exception).

3. IMO, the Transformers franchise has been the model of how to juggle multiple continuities. Sure, some fans don't like Bayformers, other fans resent G1's revered status. But at the end of the day, it's understood that they're all separate continuity families and don't have to affect each other in any way, unless you want them to. It's not a perfect model, but it's by far the best one I've experienced.
Sav C, GBPaulRivera liked this

I don't remember exactly, But I think I've had pr[…]

Someone ID'd them on Facebook first, there w[…]

Two specific ideas I have are basically holiday sp[…]

While waiting impatiently for Frozen Empire to rel[…]