Discuss the new Ghostbusters movie to be released in 2016, directed by Paul Feig.
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4894182
This is an interview with Dan Aykroyd from this morning, concerning ATC's budget and how it affected the success of the movie. Interesting comment on Feig, to say the least, heh. I did say from the beginning it wasn't right for Reitman and Aykroyd to be pushed out of the process. Kudos to them for playing ball anyway, but it wasn't the right choice on Sony and Feig's part.

deadderek, Wafflerobot, SpaceBallz and 4 others liked this
User avatar
By Wafflerobot
#4894200
I saw this this morning and was really surprised how honest he was about it. Very interesting

edit- I've noticed they have edited out this part of the interview when you try to re-watch this episode on this shows website .
Last edited by Wafflerobot on June 5th, 2017, 9:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
JurorNo.2 liked this
By philmorgan81
#4894204
LOL!! I hope I don't start a flame war because that is not my intention, but I love how it sounds like Dan Aykroyd just throws Paul Feig under the bus. It is interesting that portion of the interview has been removed. I wonder how future projects will be approached as they move forward.

I still see good things on the horizon. I know many are split on ATC it certainly wasn't my cup of tea, but perhaps it needed to be made in order for superior projects to be made in the future. Time will tell. I really hope that animated film knocks it out of the park. :) :) :)
JurorNo.2 liked this
By Commander_Jim
#4894205
Doesnt seem like theres any love lost between Dan and Feig lol.

Is this the first time someone from the Ghostbusters camp, or Ghost Corps I guess I should say, has confirmed that there wont be a sequel? I know Feig has said things like "he hasnt heard anything" which made a sequel seem doubtful, but this is the first time Ive seen someone from either Sony or Ghost Corps flat out say that there wont be a sequel.

Im also in the camp of "good cast, wrong director", though for reasons not to do with the budget.
JurorNo.2 liked this
User avatar
By SpaceBallz
#4894208
“The girls are great in it. Kate McKinnon, Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig – what a wonderful, wonderful players they are – and Leslie Jones. I was really happy with the movie, but it cost too much. And Sony does not like to lose money. It made a lot of money around the world but just cost too much, making it economically not feasible to do another one. So that’s too bad – the director, he spent too much on it. He didn’t shoot scenes we suggested to him and several scenes that were going to be needed and he said: “Nah, we don’t need them”. Then we tested the movie and they needed them and he had to go back. About $30 to $40 million in reshoots. So he will not be back on the Sony lot anytime soon.”


http://www.scified.com/news/dan-aykroyd ... z4j5PgNZ37

OHHH SNAP!!! Oh my god, I hope this will unfold into a spectacular poo flinging match. PLEASE GIVE ME ANOTHER REASON TO BUY POPCORN!

Image
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4894209
philmorgan81 wrote:It is interesting that portion of the interview has been removed.


Yeah why did they do that? Why do they care?
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4894210
SpaceBallz wrote:
OHHH SNAP!!! Oh my god, I hope this will unfold into a spectacular poo flinging match.


Can I shock you and say you and I agree? I like Hollywood throw downs. :twisted: Especially after everything we've all gone through. And at least it's not about Trump this week!
SpaceBallz, timeware liked this
By Coover5
#4894211
Unfortunately if Dan Aykroyd gets the reins back he can't do Hellbent. If gender swapping the cast was controversial imagine a film about a Donald Trump knock-off ruling hell. LOL

Glad Aykroyd feels safe to speak so freely now. I guess his contractual obligations were up.
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4894212
Coover5 wrote:Unfortunately if Dan Aykroyd gets the reins back he can't do Hellbent. If gender swapping the cast was controversial imagine a film about a Donald Trump knock-off ruling hell. LOL


Yeah thanks a lot, Kathy Griffin, you ruined everything! ;)
User avatar
By Doctor Venkman
#4894213
I enjoyed ATC for what it was, even though it wasn't what I would have preferred (think "Force Awakens" type situation). But I find the comments very interesting, nonetheless. Having finally visited Ghost Corps just a week ago, I can't help but imagine these creative minds sitting in that conference room and discussing what Dan is saying.

Even though I enjoyed the movie, I'll likely always side with Ivan and Dan on what should be or should have been done.
JurorNo.2 liked this
By philmorgan81
#4894214
Doctor Venkman wrote:I enjoyed ATC for what it was, even though it wasn't what I would have preferred (think "Force Awakens" type situation). But I find the comments very interesting, nonetheless. Having finally visited Ghost Corps just a week ago, I can't help but imagine these creative minds sitting in that conference room and discussing what Dan is saying.

Even though I enjoyed the movie, I'll likely always side with Ivan and Dan on what should be or should have been done.



Awesome! You went to Ghost Corps a week ago? From what you saw does the office look or feel busy? I mean in your opinion does it feel like an office full of people pushing aspects of the franchise forward? Sorry for the geeky questions I just wanted to hear some details from someone who has actually been there. I am hoping that Ghost Corps runs like any company and is just a bunch of idea people running around and just doing everything they can to make Ghostbusters as big as other IPs like the Marvel Properties or Star Wars. I know it is unlikely Ghostbusters would ever be that big, but it's fun to think about. :) :) :)
User avatar
By timeware
#4894218
JurorNo.2 wrote:
Coover5 wrote:Unfortunately if Dan Aykroyd gets the reins back he can't do Hellbent. If gender swapping the cast was controversial imagine a film about a Donald Trump knock-off ruling hell. LOL


Yeah thanks a lot, Kathy Griffin, you ruined everything! ;)


Paul buys a Dan mannequin, photo goes viral, has a phony press conference with Gloria Allred. Film at Eleven.
JurorNo.2 liked this
By Coover5
#4894219
You guys are treating this like it's a joke! The only time it's acceptable to have a photograph of a disembodied head is if you send a picture of a Moldavian tyrant through a spectral analyzer!
JurorNo.2 liked this
User avatar
By timeware
#4894220
Nothing Kathy did was funny, in all honesty I thought it was a cry for help and an act. I didn't mean my post as a joke, this is something I can actually see Paul doing since he likes to photo shop things now.
pferreira1983 liked this
By Commander_Jim
#4894222
Do we have any idea of what scenes Feig thought the movie didnt need? Do we know what scenes were reshoots? Given the cost I can only imagine they must have been big effects scenes. I cant think of anything in the way of ghosts or action scebes that wouldnt seriously harm the film if it was removed.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4894223
I believe the Portal scene was added, with the dance scene removed, Abby testing the protonpack was added, and Erin's subplot with leaving the team removed and the big battle at the end was shortened, with the many onlooking ghosts replaced by mist. Might be more, but this is out of the top of my head.
By RichardLess
#4894224
JurorNo.2 wrote:This is an interview with Dan Aykroyd from this morning, concerning ATC's budget and how it affected the success of the movie. Interesting comment on Feig, to say the least, heh. I did say from the beginning it wasn't right for Reitman and Aykroyd to be pushed out of the process. Kudos to them for playing ball anyway, but it wasn't the right choice on Sony and Feig's part.



Wow! Gotta love Danny boy! Sounds like he's peeved off. Noticed how he didn't mention Feig by name? He just said "the director". Wow. I love it! Dan doesn't care if he rattles the cages and I love it!

"He will be not welcome back on the Sony lot anytime soon". Amazing


What's funny is the movie had its budget slashed from when Amy Pascal was running it and GB2016 cost what the average special effects tentpole these days cost. 30-40 million is reshoots can't be right. It just can't be. That's a ton of money! All the reshoots on World War Z amounted to 25 million and they had to refilm the entire 3rd act.

I love when people get candid about the process. I love it!
Last edited by Kingpin on June 5th, 2017, 1:26 am, edited 1 time in total. Reason: Fixed quote code
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4894225
I love Dan... but I admittedly can't help but feel his reaction/response in this interview is maybe a tad hypocritical, given how his own original proposal for Ghostbusters (prior to re-writes by Harold) was deemed too expensive to film.
Alphagaia, Wafflerobot liked this
User avatar
By SpaceBallz
#4894226
His proposal for the original film was too expensive too. I think since time has passed he's allowed some opinion, if not (since the interview was edited) then he has lost patience. Feig took this franchise/project to himself and tried to make it something it wasn't supposed to be. Like Pepsi going to Crystal Pepsi. It just wasn't supposed to be.
pferreira1983 liked this
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4894227
I think the expensive reshoots are because Sony panicked after the backlash, and wanted to return to more jokes (Abby and tbe protogun) and conventional action (Rowan in the portal) and less things like Erin leaving the GBsubplot.
By RichardLess
#4894228
Kingpin wrote:I love Dan... but I admittedly can't help but feel his reaction/response in this interview is maybe a tad hypocritical, given how his own original proposal for Ghostbusters (prior to re-writes by Harold) was deemed too expensive to film.


How is that hypocritical? You can't compare a draft that he knew wouldn't get made to a finished product. Plus economics back in the day were different. He also wasn't a producer on the original film was he? The reboot he wore a different hat. Producers need to think differently. It's all about the money. Not to mention this is all hindsight. This wouldn't be an issue if the movie hadn't lost 70 million dollars.
seekandannoy, Robzy, SpaceBallz and 1 others liked this
By RichardLess
#4894230
If you read the article on deadline.com or THR they both note that Aykroyd has the wrong figure on the reshoots costs. Which make sense. Sony says the reshoots were in the 3-4 million dollar range. If Feig went 40 million over budget on reshoots the press would've been all over it. Look what happened with Rogue One and World War Z. No way did the reshoots cost as much as Danny is claiming.

Dan likes to play fast and loose with the facts. Remember when he said his crystal skull vodka was better than other Vodka because it didn't contain glycol(anti freeze?). Yeah no Vodka has ever had anti freeze in it. He mixed up Glycol & Glycerol, which are two different things. Glycerol is totally safe. He also maintained that other vodkas use citrus oil which is used to kill bugs. Half truth. Just like no one would survive drinking pure alcohol, pure citrus oil isn't good for you. But Vodka companies don't use pure citrus oil, they water it waaaay down. Same with alcohol. Otherwise people would be dying. That being said Crystal Head vodka is insanely smooth and quite good. Still Danny Boy has a history of getting his facts mixed up. He also thinks Ghosts are real, which is...ridiculous.
Alphagaia, devilmanozzy liked this
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4894232
RichardLess wrote:How is that hypocritical?


I guess I just feel that given the aforementioned "unbudgetable" Ghostbusters proposal, and at least two films under his belt that is my understanding were commercial flops (Blues Brothers 2000 and Nothing But Trouble), and given how much praise he was heaping on Feig prior and during the film's release, that maybe he'd be a bit more sympathetic to the costings of things... especially with you mentioning that the cost of the reshoots was closer to 4 million rather than 40.
Alphagaia liked this
By RichardLess
#4894234
Kingpin wrote:
RichardLess wrote:How is that hypocritical?


I guess I just feel that given the aforementioned "unbudgetable" Ghostbusters proposal, and at least two films under his belt that is my understanding were commercial flops (Blues Brothers 2000 and Nothing But Trouble), and given how much praise he was heaping on Feig prior and during the film's release, that maybe he'd be a bit more sympathetic to the costings of things... especially with you mentioning that the cost of the reshoots was closer to 4 million rather than 40.


Sure but saying because he wrote a draft that was going to be expensive over 30 years ago and that makes him a hypocrite is just plain wrong. Especially when it wasn't a shooting script. It was a draft.
Writers usually do a draft for them and a draft for the studio. Everyone knew that script wasn't going to be made. Calling him a hypocrite for that isn't fair. As for the other stuff you mention in your reply? Maybe. It certainly isn't very professional of him. But I love it none the less lol

Did he praise Feig? I remember him praising the cast and the movie but I don't recall him going into the behind the scenes stuff. If anyone has any examples I'd love to read em. Again this is all being done in hindsight. Why did the movie fail? Because it didn't make money. Why didn't it make money? Because it cost more than it took it. Therefore it was too expensive. I've said before the cost of the film shocks me. Looking at the movie, the cast and the behind the scenes talent? With what's on screen? I'd say this didn't need to cost more than 125 million. I'd love to know where that money went. Cause it certainly didn't end up on screen. Then again some directors are better than others at managing budget and getting it up on screen. It's a tricky process.

I can't wait for Aykroyd's response to the press this is getting. Strap in folks, this could get juicy.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4894236
I would not be surprised if a lot of the money went to rights and to sweeten the deal to create GhostCorps.
User avatar
By JurorNo.2
#4894239
Ehh, watching it again, this really wasn't a big deal. The bit about the Sony lot was clearly a bit of snark that got lingered on when the interviewers laughed. He is a comedian after all. ;) Not saying he and Feig are besties, but I do think this "story" has largely been click bait. I kinda feel like a sheep sharing it now, lol.

Up to you Kingpin I guess, should it stay?
By Commander_Jim
#4894240
Kingpin wrote: that maybe he'd be a bit more sympathetic to the costings of things... especially with you mentioning that the cost of the reshoots was closer to 4 million rather than 40.

Doesn't sound to me that it's so much the cost of the reshoots that is Dans problem, more the fact they had to be done at all because Feig didn't listen to him and Reitman.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4894241
I'm very curious what they actually wanted added in the reshoots. Maybe Feig and Dan had different ideas about which storylines were most important in the movie. Don't forget the first cut (containing all storylines) was looooooong. Once you cut stuff other stuff can be given more time or need more explanation as combined scenes containing those are lost.

I'd love to see that version!

That's sounds AMAZING! Thanks Zeta. I play the fi[…]

So I've been hard at work building my pack. Got a […]

Dan Aykroyd on ATC's Budget

Logic is maximizing your budget. When we're talki[…]

Anovos Acquires GB License

I mean... what are we working with here? I'm not s[…]