RichardLess wrote: ↑October 19th, 2021, 3:49 am
Not a huge deal, since Struzan's style was still his style later in his career, but this is from 2003.
K_Centric0001 wrote: ↑October 19th, 2021, 12:56 pm I could see a sequel to Afterlife being basically like "IT". kids dealing with ghosts in their town with ghostbusting gadgets Egon hid away. They are just kids after all. And unless they have a growth spurt in a few years then they will just be teenagers.
I think the reason why this film is the way it is, is because they want to change up the formula so Ghostbusters doesn't just have to stand for a business venture. Even Reitman himself said he could see multiple types of directions the franchise could go
Yeah, I mean...I have pretty mixed feelings about the business operating as the premise for a movie. It's good for a TV show, which is why "RGB" works, but I think even the filmmakers have sort of struggled with how to turn "successful business" into a single story with a localized conflict, which is why literally every Ghostbusters
movie ever made has refused to center itself around that. Probably because if there's a Ghostbusters business in every city in America, it makes the characters we're following seem less special, somehow (even if they wouldn't be to us).
DocLathropBrown wrote: ↑October 19th, 2021, 7:31 pmSure, these folks aren't specific GB nuts like us, but anyone who uses the internet outside of Facebook or Instagram is still too niche of a group to speak for the general audience. Regular folks who walk the street aren't posting in a movies subreddit. The internet isn't an accurate barometer for anything related to the public at large, no matter the group. FB has a wide enough, pedestrian base that I might give it some thought. But beyond that, anywhere else is still a narrow group of people.
Don't overthink it. I don't think GB has enough mainstream attention to guarantee some kind of billion dollar hit, but the property is certainly known, thanks in large part to the theme song continuing to permeate pop culture.
I work at Starbucks and a fair amount of my co-workers (everyday folks in their early to mid 20s) still didn't know GB:A was coming. THAT's more reflective of the general populace. If the movie's good, word of mouth is going to be what makes it money--average people don't know enough about GB to have much of an opinion on it either way. Trust me.
I think you underestimate the value of the internet as a barometer for normal people (I mean, how many people's parents use facebook? I know mine both have one, and my aunt, and plenty of other people I knew from high school who seem completely detached from pop culture), but I still mostly agree with this. The one catch is that average people not having an existing pop culture investment in Ghostbusters
to have some sort of pre-existing opinion or to be broadly aware the movie is coming is more of a handicap than an asset. Does good word-of-mouth have to then overcome the possibility that the kids in question haven't seen the first two movies, and this is a sequel?
Chicken, He Clucked wrote: ↑October 19th, 2021, 10:24 pmAlso the Mini Puft idea dates back to the original 80’s comic run, and anyone who uses either Groot or Yoda as a reference are filling their nappies with too many contemporary Disney movies. Clearly, Gremlins-inspired if anything (even Minions given the slapstick).
The other other lazy complaint is Stranger Things Busters which only works if you reduce the original movie down to one facet: irreverent comedy - and ignore the other genres mashed up in there eg. the horror is played straight. And also the cartoon which regularly veered into other moods and sentimentality.
The Baby Yoda thing is funny because the movie wrapped in October 2019, and "The Mandalorian" started airing in November. But I think "Stranger Things" has at least a little merit -- even if Jason wasn't going for it, surely the studio is leaning into that with the marketing, and/or it factored into their decision to greenlight the movie.