Discuss the upcoming movie to be released in 2020 and directed by Jason Reitman.
#4949198
Kingpin wrote: May 10th, 2021, 11:14 am I'd rather take the Star Trek TV series or MCU approach, we grow and age with the franchise... The familiar characters we know eventually bow out (and the most popular are given a show-stopping final send-off), while helping to set up their successors... Like what happened with Cap and Falcon.
I'd prefer that route myself.

However... none of us yet know how we'll actually respond to the idea of a dead Ghostbuster. Having a cast that ages out will definitely force that question and introduce the idea of death in a less fun way than zapping and trapping.

It's yet to be seen how an audience responds to the idea of a Ghostbuster themselves being a ghost permanently. Might bring up more philosophical questions about the nature of their job than people want to grapple with in a series that is ostensibly rooted in comedy.

A Batman-esque reboot avoids those questions. It's not my favorite idea, but this franchise does have different considerations than most when it comes to mortality.
Kingpin liked this
#4949201
Jason said during the GB event on the Sony Lot something along the lines that ATC opened the door to a different side of GB. To do things a little different, which allowed him to do things different as well. Hence the focus on a family down on their luck instead of the GB we know and love.

Perhaps this also means this outing will tug more on the hearthstrings? Be more than just a comedy?
I mean, we already have a family down on their luck being forced out of their home and the trailer approached that part quite seriously. This will probably mean the death of an estranged family member is going to be a main theme. Especially as they get to know him by digging through the rubble of his life.

Now I don't think this movie will be a tragedy, and there will definitely be (many) lighter moments, I mean the premise is still catching ghosts, but perhaps this time it will also produce tears. Of joy and sadness.

Isn't that also a big strength of GB? To take matters serious, but also produce a laugh?
#4949202
I mean, we definitely see how much bigger and better Ghostbusters can be than just limiting it to the same formula. Right off the bat and sight unseen, the strengths of this film are not following the first one beat for beat. I love that Reitman is going to tell a different story, and something that almost certainly has to be more emotional than the first two.

I'll just be curious to see if the studio decides to proceed in the same universe with an all new crew, or reboot it to attract an audience nostalgic for the original characters. Will it be MIB International, or a bunch of Spider-man reboots? Time will tell.
Kingpin liked this
#4949205
Chicken, He Clucked wrote: May 10th, 2021, 8:45 am
Davideverona wrote: May 10th, 2021, 7:52 am Sony just released the trailer for Venom 2, "only in movie theaters" in September.

That's 4 months away, so we can reasonably expect a new trailer for Ghostbusters Afterlife in July?
As an aside, the first Venom movie was one of the worst I've seen this decade and the sequel trailer looks somehow worse.

Tom Hardy doing some perplexing acting while an annoying voiceover says not funny lines and shoddily placed CGI tentacles fly out of his back and trash stuff.

Worth remembering Venom and MIB: International are good indicators of how Sony would be (mis)handling the Ghostbusters franchise if it weren't for Ghost Corp.
I know I shit on Sony a lot & that I’m hard on them but Jesus. Sometimes it’s like they don’t give a shit. Granted, considering Tom Rothman is currently running the place...

I’m trying to think when Sony last made a good-great film that they grew & developed in house. Once Upon a Time in Hollywood doesn’t count. That was auteur driven. The Spider-Man movies are creatively handled by Disney.
Spider-Man Into the Spiderverse was developed in house, that was great. That’s 1(and even then they had this awesome Spider-Man movie that I think should’ve been way more successful)
It’s embarrassing how bad they are at developing quality films. Even the ones that make money like Venom are terrible & get awful reviews. Men in Black? No good. Ghostbusters? failed. Dragon Tattoo series? Failed. The Tom Hanks Robert Langdon book series? Failed. Charlie’s Angels? Failed
Jumanji & Bad Boys are about the only live action movies developed in house that got decent reviews & box office. They couldn’t even hang onto the James Bond movies. It’s a joke.

For some reason Sony makes these idiotic creative choices. Look at the Uncharted movie. They could’ve hired a director with proven track record. But no. They hired the guy whose best movie is the first Zombieland and every movie since has been dogshit. Or Morbius. Who do they get? The director of “Safe House”. I mean come on! These are suppose to be movies that start a franchise & look at the directors they are getting. B & C list journey men. Meanwhile Marvel finds these diamond in the rough filmmakers like Taikia Waititi, the Russo’s, James Gunn, Chloe Zhao.
In the right hands Uncharted could’ve been something special. An Indiana Jones for the social media age. I won’t hold my breath.
#4949208
It's almost like they're going for the B and C-list directors because they can't or won't spend the money to hire an A-lister, which just ends up being a false economy because what they'll pay for will ultimately lead to a B/C-list product.

Jason may prove to be the diamond in the rough/ace in the hole because he's freaking passionate about this project.
deadderek, SpaceBallz liked this
#4949213
Kingpin wrote: May 11th, 2021, 7:00 pm It's almost like they're going for the B and C-list directors because they can't or won't spend the money to hire an A-lister, which just ends up being a false economy because what they'll pay for will ultimately lead to a B/C-list product.

Jason may prove to be the diamond in the rough/ace in the hole because he's freaking passionate about this project.
Yeah it’s honestly odd at how inept they are. Then again, Tom Rothman is the man who hired Tim Story to make not 1 but *2* Fantastic Four movies. Took the Alien & Predator franchises & made them a joke. Made a PG-13 Die Hard movie(and a PG-13 Alien/Predator movie). It amazes me why any company would chose him to run it. I know the saying “no one sets out to make a bad movie” but sometimes, with that man...I have to wonder.

Jason Reitman is certainly the right filmmaker for the job. He’s a little too established & acclaimed to be considered a diamond in the rough given his Oscar nominations & wins but an ace in the hole? Most definitely.
deadderek liked this
#4949214
Chicken, He Clucked wrote: May 10th, 2021, 8:45 am
Davideverona wrote: May 10th, 2021, 7:52 am Sony just released the trailer for Venom 2, "only in movie theaters" in September.

That's 4 months away, so we can reasonably expect a new trailer for Ghostbusters Afterlife in July?
As an aside, the first Venom movie was one of the worst I've seen this decade and the sequel trailer looks somehow worse.

Tom Hardy doing some perplexing acting while an annoying voiceover says not funny lines and shoddily placed CGI tentacles fly out of his back and trash stuff.

Worth remembering Venom and MIB: International are good indicators of how Sony would be (mis)handling the Ghostbusters franchise if it weren't for Ghost Corp.
They took a financially successful movie in Venom and doubled down on the one thing people seemed to respond well too. I wouldn't exactly be blaming Sony for that.
droidguy1119 liked this
#4949215
Batman & Robin made money and thankfully someone had the common sense to pull the plug.
Davideverona liked this
#4949216
Batman & Robin was considered a box office bomb. Venom was considered a box office hit. Not exactly the same thing.

Edit: Anyhoo, I don't want to derail or keep derailing the thread or anything, so anyone reading can promptly just ignore my last few posts, lol.
Last edited by Kalonthar on May 12th, 2021, 4:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
#4949217
I knew it underperformed but didn't know it bombed. Is making $238.2 million worldwide against a production budget of $160 million a bomb? Well come to think of it with the marketing at $125 million yes.

Well when a movie bombs at the box office, it makes sense to learn from the mistake and try something else. Very wise lesson to learn.
#4949219
Between the cereal and the Twinkies...that's awesome and all but I'm REALLY REALLY hoping we get some sort of Ecto Cooler. Even just a limited release...pretty please.
#4949228
timeware wrote: May 12th, 2021, 9:58 am Good luck finding it if they do.
I lucked out. All of my local retailers from Walmart to Meijer (regional big box store), and eventually Big Lots had plenty available.
#4949229
I kid you not.

Tobin, my 4 year old, just made a new friend, and Tobin's buddy is called Jason. It's too perfect.

He doesn't know it yet, but I will do my very, very best to make sure he will marry the guy if he swings that way. Failing that, they have to be best friends for life or I'll take away all his toys.

I helped give him life, it's the least he can do, right?
Prime 1986, Kingpin, lozbloke and 2 others liked this
#4949233
deadderek wrote: May 12th, 2021, 6:21 am Between the cereal and the Twinkies...that's awesome and all but I'm REALLY REALLY hoping we get some sort of Ecto Cooler. Even just a limited release...pretty please.
Let's hope it's better than the 2016 re-release of Ecto Cooler, because that thing was a joke. Even in the Boston area (where the dang movie was shot!) it was like trying to find a needle in a haystack, and before you knew it, the Ecto Cooler was gone like a Class 1 vapor.
deadderek liked this
#4949238
RichardLess wrote: May 11th, 2021, 5:59 pmI’m trying to think when Sony last made a good-great film that they grew & developed in house. The Spider-Man movies are creatively handled by Disney.
We went back and forth over this before, and I maintain it isn't really true. Marvel and Sony equally approved the director and the lead. They both discuss the story, both as a movie and as part of the larger MCU. Sony hires the writers, and the writers work under Sony to create the script, which is then approved by Marvel. Then Sony does all the hard work of actually making the movie, and by all accounts Marvel is not an active participant -- Feige has movies at Marvel to oversee. Sony then sets its own release dates (sometimes against Marvel's own wishes, like when they dropped Far From Home only a couple of months after Endgame) and markets the movie themselves. At best, Marvel participates in about 25% of the process.

As someone who always hopes that good work is recognized and appreciated, it really bugs me that Sony, a studio that made two extremely popular and successful Spider-Man movies in the 2000s (and one unfairly-maligned third entry), two admittedly misguided reboot movies in the 2000s, and three extremely popular and successful Spider-Man movies in the 2010s (at least one of which we can agree they did completely by themselves), and a critically maligned but very popular spin-off (an 81% audience score on RT) is somehow the studio that needed Marvel to save their Spider-Man track record. Even if you want to argue about how much Marvel contributed to the two Holland movies, that's three home runs in the all-Sony territory (and for my money, two solid doubles).
RichardLess wrote: May 11th, 2021, 5:59 pmThe Tom Hanks Robert Langdon book series? Failed.
These may not have been critically acclaimed or particularly memorable movies, but all did 3x their budget before home video, even Inferno, so I wouldn't really call that a failure.
RichardLess wrote: May 11th, 2021, 5:59 pmThey couldn’t even hang onto the James Bond movies. It’s a joke.
It doesn't sound like Sony was making very much money on the James Bond movies. It could be argued that Sony didn't even want them. EON drives a hard bargain. https://deadline.com/2015/10/daniel-cra ... 201528241/
RichardLess wrote: May 11th, 2021, 5:59 pmFor some reason Sony makes these idiotic creative choices. Look at the Uncharted movie. They could’ve hired a director with proven track record. But no. They hired the guy whose best movie is the first Zombieland and every movie since has been dogshit.
To be fair, they hired a guy who just delivered them two hits, one that scored $856m versus a $100m budget (Venom) and the other which essentially achieved the 3x multiplier (Zombieland: Double Tap), which itself was a sequel to another one of his movies that was a huge hit for Sony. You don't have to like the guy to understand the business decision. I don't know if anyone expected Venom to be as big as it was; I know I didn't. I can't say I'd bet money on it, because it sounds like a fatally troubled production, but maybe they felt he could do the same for Uncharted.
RichardLess wrote: May 12th, 2021, 12:04 amYeah it’s honestly odd at how inept they are. Then again, Tom Rothman is the man who hired Tim Story to make not 1 but *2* Fantastic Four movies. Took the Alien & Predator franchises & made them a joke. Made a PG-13 Die Hard movie (and a PG-13 Alien/Predator movie). It amazes me why any company would chose him to run it.
Again, you may not think these were creatively sound decisions, but all of the movies in this comment, with the exception of Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, were undeniable hits. The guy gets hired because his movies make the studios millions of dollars. Not that complicated.
#4949243
timeware wrote: May 12th, 2021, 7:25 pm They don't allow sugar in your cereal but you can have marshmallows? WTF man! Lol.
My uneducated guess? The difference here is that breakfast is an important meal, and the sugar cereal is basically candy in disguise, while marshmallow can be easily identified as candy, and (hopefully) not used as a breakfast.
Sav C liked this
#4949245
Alphagaia wrote: May 12th, 2021, 11:38 pm
timeware wrote: May 12th, 2021, 7:25 pm They don't allow sugar in your cereal but you can have marshmallows? WTF man! Lol.
My uneducated guess? The difference here is that breakfast is an important meal, and the sugar cereal is basically candy in disguise, while marshmallow can be easily identified as candy, and (hopefully) not used as a breakfast.
Basically yeah, we have a health guide in place and if things dont meet it they dont get sold.
Alphagaia liked this
#4949246
mrmichaelt wrote: May 12th, 2021, 5:10 pm Pascall Marshmallows has a tie-in product, seen in Australia.
https://ghostbustersnews.com/2021/05/12 ... australia/
For the few that were still hoping or thinking otherwise. It specifically says 'Only in cinema's', so perhaps that finally puts the uncertainty at rest what the plans are about which release options they will use.
deadderek liked this
#4949247
Alphagaia wrote: For the few that were still hoping or thinking otherwise. It specifically says 'Only in cinema's', so perhaps that finally puts the uncertainty at rest what the plans are about which release options they will use.
Image
Hairy Biker wrote: May 12th, 2021, 11:20 pm We tax smokes here, but not booze 🤷🏻‍♂️
So that everyone buys booze to commiserate over having so much taxes put on cigarettes?
Image
#4949248
Alphagaia wrote: May 13th, 2021, 1:10 am
mrmichaelt wrote: May 12th, 2021, 5:10 pm Pascall Marshmallows has a tie-in product, seen in Australia.
https://ghostbustersnews.com/2021/05/12 ... australia/
For the few that were still hoping or thinking otherwise. It specifically says 'Only in cinema's', so perhaps that finally puts the uncertainty at rest what the plans are about which release options they will use.
There was never a single reason to doubt it. Especially with the comments Jason has made.
mrmichaelt, Alphagaia liked this
#4949249
Oh, I know. Yet here we were, some people still second guessing it because he didn't say 'only' and/or others hoping they would change their strategy.

That being said, I can partially understand the last group, but at least it should be clear what to expect, agreeing with it or not.
deadderek liked this
  • 1
  • 503
  • 504
  • 505
  • 506
  • 507
  • 528

While this song is horrible, it's still better the[…]

No, those chips were scratch built by me and the c[…]

Anyone have pictures of the post explaining how to[…]

I'll give it to the end of "quarter 2" J[…]