Discuss the upcoming movie to be released in 2020 and directed by Jason Reitman.
#4939765
Counterpoint: a 3 also indicates a lot of missed lore, while a standalone title indicates a minimum amount of pre-knowledge.

Especially after a reboot which started at 1, people might wonder where the second movie went.
Sav C, Kingpin, Corey91 and 1 others liked this
#4939768
groschopf wrote: September 25th, 2020, 12:04 pm Calling a sequel the third installment 31 years after the last one sets critics up to write headlines like "Is Ghostbusters 3 Dead on Arrival?" or "Ghostbuster 3 Decades Too Late."
Afterlife has the same problems. “There’s little life in Ghostbusters Afterlife”. “Is The Ghostbusters franchise destined for the afterlife?” “Bill Murray shows no signs of life in this new Ghostbusters film”. “You May wish you were in the afterlife” blah blah. Any critic can spin that shit. You can’t worry about those sorts of things.
Sav C, Corey91, SpaceBallz liked this
#4939769
Alphagaia wrote: September 25th, 2020, 12:36 pm Counterpoint: a 3 also indicates a lot of missed lore, while a standalone title indicates a minimum amount of pre-knowledge.

Especially after a reboot which started at 1, people might wonder where the second movie went.
As much as I would prefer if it was called GBIII, I think that it is probably wise to not allude to it being a sequel. Lots of people, like me, don't tend to watch sequels if they haven't seen the first movie yet. While this might not be a big obstacle for a young franchise, it may pose some problems for an older franchise that is trying to bring in younger viewers. Calling it Ghostbusters: Afterlife signals that you can appreciate the film without seeing first two, even though it is a continuation. I dunno, I think it's a bit of a gamble either way.

Plus, as you point out, some people might mistake it as a third sequel to the reboot, and I have a feeling that Sony wants to avoid that as well.
Alphagaia, Kingpin, droidguy1119 and 1 others liked this
#4939771
Alphagaia wrote: September 25th, 2020, 12:36 pm Counterpoint: a 3 also indicates a lot of missed lore, while a standalone title indicates a minimum amount of pre-knowledge.

Especially after a reboot which started at 1, people might wonder where the second movie went.
Jane you ignorant slut.

(Since it’s now 2020 I gotta explain the joke. SNL use to have a bit called “Point Counter Point” with Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtain. It was a parody of the political talking head shows like “Hardball” and the like. Jane would always make some valid political point, and Dan, playing a conservative misogynistic type, would always reply “Jane you ignorant slut”. It was funny. Maybe you had to be there)

Yup. I acknowledge that’s totally a possibility. But I think it’s fair to assume more would associate it with the original franchise. But you’re right, I guarantee someone, somewhere would have that thought



Cleetus: “Gee ‘ma. I swears this here Ghostbusters movie is one of dem sequels Hollywood folk is always talkin bout. But I reckon that according to this here movie poster, it’s the 3rd one. Did we miss the other 4 movies?”

Pa: “4 movies? Shoot Cleetus ain’t you done yer schoolin? 4 comes *after* 3. We’ve missed... 5 of dem Ghostbustin movies”

Cleetus: “Sorry Pa. I don’t count so good ever since I lost my fingers feedin that gator out back. Let’s just go back to our swamp hole & watch Larry The Cable Guy: Health Inspector for 103rd time”
BatDan, Dr.D liked this
#4939780
BatDan wrote: September 25th, 2020, 3:31 pm man, if you have to explain a Dan Aykroyd quote in a forum dedicated to Dan Aykroyd...
Not everyones gets to see SNL. I don't think it's ever been shown on British television outside of cable, or beyond the occasional segment spoofing a famous franchise during a night honouring said franchise (like Star Trek - cue another Dan Aykroyd SNL reference).
Wafflerobot, Alphagaia liked this
#4939782
Kingpin wrote: September 25th, 2020, 3:34 pm
BatDan wrote: September 25th, 2020, 3:31 pm man, if you have to explain a Dan Aykroyd quote in a forum dedicated to Dan Aykroyd...
Not everyones gets to see SNL. I don't think it's ever been shown on British television outside of cable, or beyond the occasional segment spoofing a famous franchise during a night honouring said franchise (like Star Trek - cue another Dan Aykroyd SNL reference).
oh i know, i was being light.

i mean I didnt know what Blackadder or Not the 9 o Clock News was til my late teens/early twenties with the help of youtube.

though we did get Young Ones, Monty Python, Mr Bean and Absolutely Faboulous here during 90s Comedy Central.

and Splitting Image was only known as 'that Genesis video with the puppets"
Last edited by Kingpin on September 25th, 2020, 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.Reason: Updated quoted text
Kingpin, Dr.D, Alphagaia liked this
#4939791
Never underestimate how dumb people can be.

I saw some guy complain someone wasn't wearing a mask in public transport, while not wearing a mask himself.

Some lady was asked to wait outside the shop of a small gas station because her husband was still filling up the tank and only three people were allowed in at the same time. She decided to stand right in the entrance doorway, blocking anyone wanting to go in or out, until her husband was done so she could pay as fast as possible.

Anyways, for us GB is second life, for many others it's just a funny movie they saw once or twice or heard of. Since it's the casuals that greatly outnumber us, they need to focus on getting their butts in seats.

GB:ATC had a name change when going digital though, so it's not completely impossible they will add a 3 somewhere for this new one, but it won't be for cinema.

Also: I absolutely love IT crowd and SNL wasn't a thing in my country for a long time.
Dr.D, deadderek, Sav C liked this
#4939795
Jurassic World: Dominion Director Says Fans ‘Underestimate’ Size of Original Cast’s Roles:

https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/jurass ... 7ZRf-WZtxE

related but kind of not related, but kind of in the same ball park.

Do you think we're underestimating the return of the OGs in Afterlife?

after listening to two new Ernie interviews this week about the film stating he was taken back by sharing the experience with old guys to "get a chance to to suit up and save the world again"; that mixed with Finn's comments on how 'theres so much more movie the trailer didnt show" i think we're getting more than meets the eye.
#4939798
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amBUT there is no way in hell that putting a “3” on that title hurts it financially.
I still trust the people who actually made this decision, and presumably for good reason.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amAlso, Sony couldn’t even get the “answer the call” thing straight with consumers last go round.
I think "Answer the Call" was Sony getting cold feet. The movie is, and should have been called Ghostbusters, as it is a remake/reboot in its own universe. I don't like "Answer the Call," and I don't use it.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amthe home release of “Edge of Tomorrow” which Universal decided to call “Live. Die. Repeat”(a much better title but confusing to some due to the title change).
Warner Bros., not Universal.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amAnd putting a 3 up on there tells them this isn’t some new reboot or reboot sequel. It’s not New Coke. It’s the classic coke. And that will get more butts in seats. Anyone who thinks that isn’t true is just straight up wrong.
This is very specifically the thing I don't agree with. I genuinely don't think the general public cares that much, and they're the demographic that matters. Either the movie looks good to people or it doesn't. We're the ones who care deeply about continuity. Plus, the audience might be dumb, but you're underestimating them -- the trailers have footage of the original cast from the events of the original movie, and it shows the original car all rusted and old. Not rocket science.

Furthermore: the reboot was a bomb, but Sony still wants to court that demographic, and they might be turned off by too much aggression on Sony's part in terms of distancing itself from that movie (thinking of Jason's comments on Bill Burr's podcast getting blown out of proportion). Trend-wise, lots of sequels are going with subtitles rather than numbers (Top Gun: Maverick, Captain America: Civil War, Terminator: Dark Fate, Alien: Covenant, etc.), so it might make the movie look out of touch (not to mention, nobody has seemed especially confused by any of these titles -- hell, they weren't even confused by Halloween 2018 being a sequel to Halloween 1978). Some people might think it would just look desperate and kind of sad (like me). Plus, you ruled out the artistic side, but the artistic argument is a financial argument -- there are probably people who would be angry if they went to see something called Ghostbusters 3 and the original Ghostbusters were barely in it.
Last edited by droidguy1119 on September 25th, 2020, 8:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
deadderek liked this
#4939800
groschopf wrote: September 25th, 2020, 12:04 pm Calling a sequel the third installment 31 years after the last one sets critics up to write headlines like "Is Ghostbusters 3 Dead on Arrival?" or "Ghostbuster 3 Decades Too Late."
Ghostbusters 3, the merchandise! I was replying to this, forgot to quote.
#4939802
I'm still confused why ANYONE thinks a trailer would drop at a toy presentation.
Corey91 liked this
#4939804
Well, they had a "pass the proton pack" trailer cut that was never released. I'd have to assume that they want a reminder to everyone that the movie is still coming out. These panels are no different than comic-con panels, the trailers always get released online shortly after.
#4939807
BatDan wrote: September 25th, 2020, 7:13 pmJurassic World: Dominion Director Says Fans ‘Underestimate’ Size of Original Cast’s Roles:

https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/jurass ... 7ZRf-WZtxE

related but kind of not related, but kind of in the same ball park.

Do you think we're underestimating the return of the OGs in Afterlife?

after listening to two new Ernie interviews this week about the film stating he was taken back by sharing the experience with old guys to "get a chance to to suit up and save the world again"; that mixed with Finn's comments on how 'theres so much more movie the trailer didnt show" i think we're getting more than meets the eye.
Yeah I have been getting that impression. :):):)
#4939808
One of the latest tweets from that questionable twitter account:
The OGs go to the Sheriff's office to retrieve the Ectomobile and the equipment after it was seized from the kids after their joyride.
This Post Contains Spoilers
#4939810
Not even questionable, that account is full of shit.
#4939815
droidguy1119 wrote: September 25th, 2020, 8:44 pm
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amBUT there is no way in hell that putting a “3” on that title hurts it financially.
I still trust the people who actually made this decision, and presumably for good reason.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amAlso, Sony couldn’t even get the “answer the call” thing straight with consumers last go round.
I think "Answer the Call" was Sony getting cold feet. The movie is, and should have been called Ghostbusters, as it is a remake/reboot in its own universe. I don't like "Answer the Call," and I don't use it.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amthe home release of “Edge of Tomorrow” which Universal decided to call “Live. Die. Repeat”(a much better title but confusing to some due to the title change).
Warner Bros., not Universal.
RichardLess wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:25 amAnd putting a 3 up on there tells them this isn’t some new reboot or reboot sequel. It’s not New Coke. It’s the classic coke. And that will get more butts in seats. Anyone who thinks that isn’t true is just straight up wrong.
This is very specifically the thing I don't agree with. I genuinely don't think the general public cares that much, and they're the demographic that matters. Either the movie looks good to people or it doesn't. We're the ones who care deeply about continuity. Plus, the audience might be dumb, but you're underestimating them -- the trailers have footage of the original cast from the events of the original movie, and it shows the original car all rusted and old. Not rocket science.

Furthermore: the reboot was a bomb, but Sony still wants to court that demographic, and they might be turned off by too much aggression on Sony's part in terms of distancing itself from that movie (thinking of Jason's comments on Bill Burr's podcast getting blown out of proportion). Trend-wise, lots of sequels are going with subtitles rather than numbers (Top Gun: Maverick, Captain America: Civil War, Terminator: Dark Fate, Alien: Covenant, etc.), so it might make the movie look out of touch (not to mention, nobody has seemed especially confused by any of these titles -- hell, they weren't even confused by Halloween 2018 being a sequel to Halloween 1978). Some people might think it would just look desperate and kind of sad (like me). Plus, you ruled out the artistic side, but the artistic argument is a financial argument -- there are probably people who would be angry if they went to see something called Ghostbusters 3 and the original Ghostbusters were barely in it.
None of those movies you mention without numbers in the title are in the same situation. Top Gun: Maverick is maybe the most comparable, but they didn’t exactly have a reboot come out and do damage to the franchise. Halloween was smart not to put a number in it. That franchise is all messed up. Reboots and sequels that are ignored. All the other ones are relatively active franchises. Most times, you don’t want a number, especially if there are ALOT of them like the Halloween & Alien franchise or Terminator(again, they couldn’t call it Terminator 3, since there was already a 3rd one).
Numbers in titles are definitely dying out. But Ghostbusters case is so unique, which is why I think it’s needed. Plus let’s not forget that Ghostbusters had a sequel with a number in it. Had the reboot not come out I don’t think a “3” would be needed. But a “3” gives people the indication of “Ok. Now this is the Ghostbusters movie you all wanted in the first place”. GB3 was in the press for decades. If Marvel called the 3rd Guardians of the Galaxy movie “Guardians of the Galaxy: Rise of the Revenge of the Age” instead of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3. It wouldn’t feel right.

The reboot really messed this franchise up. GB16 has such a toxic reputation & hatred that anyway possible to differentiate it from that movie is the right call. I mean..people hate that movie who haven’t even seen it. Heck I’d almost recommend calling it “Ghostbusters 3: This Movie Has Nothing To Do With The 2016 Ghostbusters Film”.

I can’t trust a company who thought it was a good idea to release that awful trailer to the public a mere 4 months prior to release. You shouldn’t either. I’ve read some of those Sony emails. The people running that company just didn’t understand this franchise at all. Yes, let Seth Rogen produce Ghostbusters. That’s what everyone wants. The ghostbusters smoking weed & making pop culture references that will feel dated in 5 years time. (Granted Rogen did recommend Gore Verbinski as a director for GB3, which is a movie I’d give my left nipple to see happen).

I don’t know. Maybe a small part of me wants that “3” in the title for selfish reasons. This has been such a long journey. So many years, so many rumours. In all that time the movie was known as Ghostbusters 3(sometimes with the Hellbent moniker). I think a part of me wants that “3” in there just so I can look up & say “we did it. This is real. It’s happening. See? Even the title says so. 25 years of waiting. I’ve lost friends and family who at one point or another I made promises to see this movie in theatres with, whenever it came out”. Maybe a “3” makes it feel part of the family. I don’t know.

What I do know is that fate is a cruel mistress. 25 years waiting for this movie. Then boom, coronavirus. God does not want this movie to exist.
philmorgan81 liked this
#4939819
Wishful thinking: Paul Reubens shows up as Ivo Shandor in Ghostbusters: Afterlife.
mrmichaelt liked this
#4939821
I wasn't wishing for him though was I?
#4939824
SpaceBallz wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:07 pm One of the latest tweets from that questionable twitter account:
The OGs go to the Sheriff's office to retrieve the Ectomobile and the equipment after it was seized from the kids after their joyride.
This Post Contains Spoilers
That's just easy to predict. I'VE suspected that will happen, and I haven't seen the script or film.
#4939825
groschopf wrote: September 26th, 2020, 9:15 am
SpaceBallz wrote: September 25th, 2020, 11:07 pm One of the latest tweets from that questionable twitter account:
The OGs go to the Sheriff's office to retrieve the Ectomobile and the equipment after it was seized from the kids after their joyride.
This Post Contains Spoilers
That's just easy to predict. I'VE suspected that will happen, and I haven't seen the script or film.
That's a good point. I've been really wondering how the OGs come to be in Summerville.

Edit: Wasn't there some speculation that the joyride scene takes place fairly early in the film?
#4939827
It's heavily implied everything in the trailer takes place early in the film.
  • 1
  • 383
  • 384
  • 385
  • 386
  • 387
  • 415

Anyone get the feeling that up and coming Ghost […]

What are you going to use to power all the pneumat[…]

Metal Trunk For My Proton Pack

Yes, It does have the content from the new employe[…]

Hook & Ladder 8, 1914

Great find, Kingpin. I know for Answer the Call, […]