Discuss the new Ghostbusters movie to be released in 2016, directed by Paul Feig.
User avatar
By TragicManner
#4911108
Back in 2016 I was REALLY excited about the all-female reboot of Ghostbusters. I tried to put aside all the controversy and I went to the movies excited to finally, after more than twenty years, see another full feature length film about people bustin' ghosts!

Leaving the theater that day, I had fun, but felt a little sad that the film didn't quite meet my expectations. The villain felt poorly developed and for some reason the peril of the scenario of the film just didn't quite click for me. But it WAS fun, and I was hoping that it would at least do well enough to warrant more movies.

After all the fallout that came in the days after, my frustration with the film grew, and my view of it became quite tarnished. I was fine just walking away from it, sad that it was another failed attempt to revive an old franchise and nothing more.

Then Halloween 2018 happened. In August I walked into a Spirit Halloween store and found a ghost trap prop which reignited my excitement for Ghostbusters. I took it home and started working on it, and my kids quickly took notice. We started talking about Ghostbusters, we watched both of the original films, started playing the video game, and even picked up some of the comic books. It was awesome, and our house had become a Ghostbusters haven, with my kids reliving the excitement that I felt for the series when I was their age. It was magical, to say the least.

Then, one day my daughter comes home and goes, "DAD! Did you know that there is ANOTHER Ghostbusters movie?!" I had almost completely forgotten about it, and after some discussion we all decided we would rent it and watch it together. As we sat down to watch the movie, I was a little uncertain about seeing it again. Would it just be a bitter-sweet reminder of what could have been? Would my kids end up loving it more than the films I loved growing up? Was I overthinking everything?

As the movie started, I quickly relaxed and, in no time at all, found myself sincerely enjoying the movie. I really liked the performances and the story just seemed to work so much better this time around, the weight of the situation that the Ghostbusters find themselves in was much more compelling, Erin's dilemma and Abby's frustration were so much better understood. And, just in case you were wondering, I was watching the original theatrical version, and for some reason, years after all the controversy had died down, after the stakes didn't seem so high, I found that I really, really enjoyed the movie. We went on Amazon that night and purchased the Blu-Ray.

Of course, the movie isn't without its flaws. The villain is still sadly underdeveloped (though I hear the extended cut helps with this, still haven't watched it yet). And, I'm sorry if this is bringing up a topic that has been beaten to death already, but I was really, REALLY sad that the movie didn't tie into the original films. Seeing all the living cast members playing parts unrelated to their prior roles was not only disappointing, but INCREDIBLY confusing to my kids ("Why doesn't Peter believe in Ghosts?! Why is Ray driving a cab? Why doesn't Winston like the ghostbusters paint job?" etc). Overall, though, the movie just didn't deserve the negative reception it earned. Personally, I didn't feel that it was as good as the 1984 Ghostbusters, but...

My kids immediately started talking about how much they loved the movie and how it was their new favorite Ghostbuster film. If there is anything that I can take away from how my kids reacted, this is a movie that, to them, is just as magical and impactful as the original film was to me back in the 80s. Someday this movie will be lauded as a cult classic that didn't get the attention it deserved by a generation currently too young to worry about such things, and that the lack of a sequel is easily one of the saddest outcomes from the reboot frenzy of the early 21st century. But hey, maybe I'm wrong.

So, in the end, the movie is bittersweet anew, but for slightly different reasons. I am pretty sad that the sequel is basically not going to happen at this point, because I really think it would have been a lot of fun. Anyway, thought I'd share because I really found a lot of enjoyment in the movie this time around, and think it's definitely worth revisiting.
Kingpin, Alphagaia, Glenn Frederick and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911117
I was always on board, and while the ending with Rowan still could have been better, the time square fight and balloons make up for it.

Not as great as the first movie, but I still include the Extended Edition when I'm in the mood to watch the three movies! I plan to take my kid to the animated version if they dub it.
By Davideverona
#4911120
I came to accept it after IDW explained it as an alternate reality and, by the way, I find their explanation for the Gb Multiverse very interesting and respectful of the original movie.

But still I find it a not so good movie. The humour is too silly... And not a Monty Python kind of silly. The CGI is too cartoony. The actresses are quite good but they deserved a better material to work on.
IDW is making a waaaaaaay better job with the same character.
Alphagaia, SpaceBallz liked this
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4911139
I came to accept it after IDW explained it as an alternate reality and, by the way, I find their explanation for the Gb Multiverse very interesting and respectful of the original movie.
In fairness, excluding that misleading teaser trailer, everything else to do with the reboot underscored it was an alternate universe to the 1984/1989 films.
Alphagaia, robbritton liked this
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911141
And even that line was insisted upon (by Reitman I believe) if I remember the interview correctly, because they wanted to show that the old movies exist, but this is something different.

Well, that failed. Not only did they mess up the four scientist line, the nod seemed misleading / confusing as people thought it was a sequel while the trailer that followed showed it was a reboot.
User avatar
By timeware
#4911149
Merchandising failed in establishing the new movie was a reboot. They didn't come out with the trailers for the longest time. I saw more advertising for the game then the actual movie itself. There was hardly any merchandise put out at all minus the twinkies. Ecto Cooler wasn't advertised and in very, very short supply. I think the twinkie packages just had the No Ghost Logo.

The store I worked at carried the twinkies but not the cooler. There was very little merchandise put out except for funko pops which were the original GB's and not the reboot. Everything reboot related went right to the clearance section right after Christmas.

Unless merch had the girls on whatever was sold (Action figures,clothes) people probably just assumed it was related to the original films. I want to say the merch actually boosted nostalgia for the original movies then create demand for the reboot.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911152
Well, the trailers and articles at least were very clear it was a world where ghostsbusting did not exist .

Funny thing by the way, it's all the royalties from the merch, VR stations, Toys (Mattel paid a lot for the rights), German Parkride, hotel rooms, (digital) homesales and Netflix deals what saved the ATC franchise from losing money (and even making a profit). Though they hoped the movie itself would already do that of course.

Especially the VR stations were a big hit and even went from 1 station to four and while it's been two years, it's still running.
User avatar
By Kingpin
Moderator
#4911165
Merchandising failed in establishing the new movie was a reboot.
What exactly were they supposed to say in the mechandising? A large sticker declaring "All-new Ghostbusters in an all-new universe!"?
Did the Kelvin Star Trek merchandise state it was a different timeline to the Motion Picture-Nemesis movies? Did the 2014 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles state (or need to) that it wasn't a continuation of the 1990s film franchise? Did Batman Begins note it wasn't a continuation of the 1980s/1990s films? Did Batman Vs Superman state it wasn't a continuation of the Batman Begins universe?

I think you'd be asking too much for the merchandise to state it when it was pretty clear from the first full trailer... Ande perhapse even the first teaser, despite that line, it was a different cinematic universe.
Alphagaia, Sav C, 80sguy and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By timeware
#4911168
All in the logos. I think Batman V Superman was pretty self explanatory that it wasn't a continuation from the last Batman movies with the Superman shield in the Batman Logo. Plus the round the clock toy commercials and new casting with Affleck.

Superman Returns wasn't really advertised as a reboot but more of a continuation of the Reeves movies.

A large sticker isn't necessary. I'm willing to bet a lot of people didn't notice the differences between the 2016 GB logo and the old one. They could have put ATC somewhere on the no ghost logo similar to what they did with the Extreme Ghostbusters Logo. If i'm remembering right I don't think Answer The Call came along until later.

There was minor updating to the 2016 no ghost logo. Point i'm trying to make is logo's move the merch. Which is why i'm saying that the orginal GB movies benifeted more then ATC unless the girls were specficly on the toys.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911170
I honestly don't even know if Batman Forever is a sequel to the Burton flicks.
Kingpin, robbritton liked this
User avatar
By Glenn Frederick
Supporting Member
#4911174
I honestly don't even know if Batman Forever is a sequel to the Burton flicks.
It's funny how I was looking up info about Batman forever just two days ago.

Yes it was a sequel to the Burton films, Tim Burton was criticize for making Batman Returns too dark when McDonald's had rights to produce Happy meal toys.

Robin Williams was going to be the Riddler, Billy Dee Williams as Two Face (the part of Max Shrek was supposed to be Harvey Two Face but Billy Dee Williams couldn't commit) and Marlon Waynes as Robin with Michael Keaton as Batman.

The character Catwoman was also to return and Burton was going to direct but after the McDonald's situation Burton was removed as Director and made instead a producer, he was even given a cameo as the Ring Master and his last name used for a Psychiatrist.

Rumor has it that Marlon Waynes and Billy Dee Williams wasn't approached after Burton left the directors chair and Robin Williams was too busy to play the Riddler.

Michael Keaton wasn't going to do the film without Burton directing so the role was given to Val Kilmer.

Also Brad Dourif was going to be the Scarecrow possible setting up the next sequel.
User avatar
By Glenn Frederick
Supporting Member
#4911175
Also while Joel Schumacher did make the film more kid friendly and kinda weird (Bat Nipples) there was scenes that were still dark.
Like the opening Two Face escape and
Bruce Wayne coming to terms with being Batman.
The biggest change in the final film which was for the worst was the opening.

It opened at Arkham Asylum showing Two Face has escaped with "The Bat must Die" in blood on the wall then cuts to Wayne Enterprise with Edward Nigma meeting Bruce Wayne, then Bruce gets a message, going to his office and dropping from his chair ending up in the Batcave, suiting up then delivering that Line "I'll take Drive through" with him rushing to the scene with Harvey/Two Face.

Honestly the "Can I persuade you to take a Sandwich with you Sir?" Followed by " I'll get Drive thru" is done better because we get serious scenes building up to finally seeing Batman standing by the new Batmobile and the first thing that he says is kinda Silly but in reality Alfred doesn't want Bruce to be hungry all night. But instead it's done as being a McDonald's Promo.

Sorry everyone about my Batman Forever rant.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911183
And the moral of the story is: don't let a fast food franchise dictate the artistic integrity of a movie.
And the longer a franchise goes on making movies, the more logo's they have to make to differentiate.
Glenn Frederick liked this
User avatar
By DarkSpectre
#4911217
The metallic embossed logo has grown on me a lot in the past few years. I've come to realize that while the film itself wasn't great, it opened up a new generation of fans and now it gave us costumers more to build or to cherry pick for the uniform. I've adopted the fingerless gloves into my gear for example, one of the gals on my team wears a classic flightsuit with ATC pack and shin guards and so on
User avatar
By Glenn Frederick
Supporting Member
#4911218
it opened up a new generation of fans and now it gave us costumers more to build or to cherry pick for the uniform. I've adopted the fingerless gloves into my gear for example, one of the gals on my team wears a classic flightsuit with ATC pack and shin guards and so on
I've even though about doing the ATC Armband for the classic Trap.

And the moral of the story is: don't let a fast food franchise dictate the artistic integrity of a movie.
Especially if it's the same fast food franchise that brought us "Mac and Me". :sigh:
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4911226
Ow yeah, the serious one with all the police cars racing towards an unknown threat. Yeah, that was awesome!

Really makes me wish Feig was allowed to do his original vision with the much more alien looking ghosts. Those looked awesome!
By 80sguy
#4911234
I'm ok with it now. It took my fan editing it and the IDW crossovers to get me fully on board with it.
I was ok with it from the start. Just like how I was ok with their being another RoboCop, Friday the 13th and tons of variations of Ninja Turtles.
All in the logos. I think Batman V Superman was pretty self explanatory that it wasn't a continuation from the last Batman movies with the Superman shield in the Batman Logo.
Not really. That could have easily been confused as a continuation if one didn't know better. If it all came down to advertising to differentiate it, then ATC did same thing already.

Plus as Kingpin said, Star Trek and Ninja Turtle merchandise didn't need to state they were "new universe films". The RoboCop remake didn't do that. The Nightmare on Elm Street remake didn't do that. If I remember correctly, they started using "Classic" on the merchandising based on the original film alongside the reboot, so they did do something to differentiate it.
If i'm remembering right I don't think Answer The Call came along until later.
At least a few posters had Answer The Call on it early on.
Alphagaia liked this

Very nice! I've been trying to purchase a shell fr[…]

I still have yet to get a good hole drilled by […]

The Real Ghostbusters Gear

In general. I can't even do a 20mm calibration cub[…]

Heya from Australia

http://i.imgur.com/1kB7fOZ.jpg