Discuss the upcoming movie to be released in 2020 and directed by Jason Reitman.
User avatar
By deadderek
#4919374
...Hey at least Bill has actually read THIS script....
He can read?? lol
His name is Bill Murry not Donald Trump.
Sav C, Kingpin, Alphagaia and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4919401
Great News!

I just hope GB3's Janine is more aking towards GB1's Janine and GB2's Janine.
Kingpin, RichRyan1507, Sav C and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By GBfan_CH
#4919402
Great News!

I just hope GB3's Janine is more aking towards GB1's Janine and GB2's Janine.

I’d go crazy if she referenced her GB2 haircut in the film. If we ever get a George Lucas style rehash of that film they need to digitally hide it with a hat.
User avatar
By Alphagaia
#4919412
Great News!

I just hope GB3's Janine is more aking towards GB1's Janine and GB2's Janine.

I’d go crazy if she referenced her GB2 haircut in the film. If we ever get a George Lucas style rehash of that film they need to digitally hide it with a hat.
Sadly, for me it wasn't just her looks. Her going for Louis instead of Egon, and her dumbing down was a let down.
User avatar
By RiverofMassHysteria
#4919420
Janine definitely had an identity crisis in the second film.

The relationship with Tully never bothered me for some reason. Maybe it's because of how much I like Rick Moranis and how he made me laugh by playing up the character's awkwardness in those scenes. Knowing now how unpopular the idea was, I kind of feel bad for going with it. But it kind of made sense to me for years, because it was the two characters from the first film who were looking for love, and found one another in the second one.

But Janine's look in the film has always perplexed me. I feel like that was a call by someone outside the production. Such a direct reference to the cartoon seems wrong in a film that pretty much negates the existence of RGB in its first five minutes.

A return to the snarkier Janine from the original would be just fine with me. An older Janine that's past it all and has zero tolerance for nonsense. I hope the talk of Annie being on board is true. I hope we get a proper reunion with all the surviving original characters, alive and well, with some decent screen time. I know the story will need to focus mostly on the new characters, and I look forward to meeting them too.
deadderek, SSJmole liked this
User avatar
By Slimered
#4919423
I don't care if we get a passing-the-torch movie, as long as we also get a back in the saddle moment with the original GB's...

Image
We'll definitely get that. After Ghostbusters: Answer The Call didn't make back its budget this film is going to give us a lot of what people were asking for before Answer The Call. Sony won't want to risk not making a profit again on a lucrative franchise like this one. It's probably also why they are going for a much smaller budget, and kids as part of the main cast rather than the 'Ben Stiller + other famous comedy actors' route.
By philmorgan81
#4919431


I’d go crazy if she referenced her GB2 haircut in the film. If we ever get a George Lucas style rehash of that film they need to digitally hide it with a hat.
Sadly, for me it wasn't just her looks. Her going for Louis instead of Egon, and her dumbing down was a let down.
Oh I am with you there. I believe Ivan Reitman stated that he went with the Janine/Louise relationship so they could have a bigger part in the film. If that was a trade off in order for them to be in the film more I am happy he made that decision. When I was a kid it really threw me off when Janine went for Louis instead of Egon, especially when the cartoon was continuing to follow the Janine/Egon relationship. However in the scene where Janine suits up Louis she puts him in one of Egon’s uniforms. The way she swoons after zipping him up and saying, “You look fantastic in this.” That kind of gave me the impression that she wasn’t quite over Egon. Now you could argue that maybe they just went for the first locker they saw or that it was more likely that Egon would have a spare clean uniform. That is just my impression though I am probably putting way more thought in it than Ivan Reitman did when he was filming it. :) :) :)
User avatar
By Michael Scott
#4919436
I’m not familiar with Production Weekly. How many actors do they usually list for something like this? This has 6, is it possible that maybe Hudson and Potts are signed on too and their names just aren’t big enough to make the short list?
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By mrmichaelt
#4919439
I’m not familiar with Production Weekly. How many actors do they usually list for something like this? This has 6, is it possible that maybe Hudson and Potts are signed on too and their names just aren’t big enough to make the short list?
These new entries are just for a specific day, it's just the cast specific to whatever scene(s) are being filmed that day. So July 15 just requires those 6 actors. So in theory, we'll have a new entry about each day coming.
Sav C liked this
By Davideverona
#4919442
I’m not familiar with Production Weekly. How many actors do they usually list for something like this? This has 6, is it possible that maybe Hudson and Potts are signed on too and their names just aren’t big enough to make the short list?
These new entries are just for a specific day, it's just the cast specific to whatever scene(s) are being filmed that day. So July 15 just requires those 6 actors. So in theory, we'll have a new entry about each day coming.
So it is really that specific? I thought it was the general cast and they'll add other names when they're signed on.
By RichardLess
#4919444
I don't care if we get a passing-the-torch movie, as long as we also get a back in the saddle moment with the original GB's...

Image
We'll definitely get that. After Ghostbusters: Answer The Call didn't make back its budget this film is going to give us a lot of what people were asking for before Answer The Call. Sony won't want to risk not making a profit again on a lucrative franchise like this one. It's probably also why they are going for a much smaller budget, and kids as part of the main cast rather than the 'Ben Stiller + other famous comedy actors' route.
The smaller budget has nothing to do with cast. I work in the Canadian film industry and filming in Calgary Vs filming in NYC, even with tax incentives, is waaaay cheaper. The Canadian dollar is lower than the American dollar. So everytime you spend X amount of money on X amount of crew and supplies, you get X amount of dollars back. Also. Jason Reitman is Canadian. Finn Wolfhard is Canadian. Dan Aykroyd are Canadian. Ivan Reitman is Canadian. Why does that matter? Sony might, might, be able to claim this as Canadian content and recieve more tax breaks.

Filming is New York is pricey. That's where GB16 filmed. You have New York hotels, New York unions, New York crew. I've been to both New York and Calgary. And one thing I can tell you with insane certainty? 10 dollars will get you waaaaaay more in Calgary than 10 dollars in New York.

One thing I can tell you for sure: GB20 is going to be a helluva lot more intimate than GB16. Unless things have drastically changed from a few months ago, and they may have, the VFX bidding had less than 750 shots estimate. (Now that might've been just for a single vendor or the entire movie).

I haven't read a script or anything close to that but here's a clue that, based on what I was told/saw, might or might not tell you something. Again, if everything's stayed the same, here's the last thing I'll say:

Violet.

Get excited ladies and gents and strap yourselves in. The next few months may prove interesting.
By Davideverona
#4919445
So it is really that specific? I thought it was the general cast and they'll add other names when they're signed on.
The past one from PW was July 14 (with Grace, Coon, Wolfhard, and Weaver) so that's why I thought it was for each day.
I asked because after the plot description there is the shooting time and it says July 15 - October 10 (i cut July doing the screenshot), so I thought it was only the generic start date with the location.

https://www.productionweekly.com/how-to/
mrmichaelt liked this
User avatar
By mrmichaelt
#4919446
I asked because after the plot description there is the shooting time and it says July 15 - October 10 (i cut July doing the screenshot), so I thought it was only the generic start date with the location.

https://www.productionweekly.com/how-to/
I see. Thanks for that link. So the start was been adjusted by a day.
User avatar
By robbritton
#4919450
The smaller budget has nothing to do with cast. I work in the Canadian film industry and filming in Calgary Vs filming in NYC, even with tax incentives, is waaaay cheaper. The Canadian dollar is lower than the American dollar. So everytime you spend X amount of money on X amount of crew and supplies, you get X amount of dollars back. Also. Jason Reitman is Canadian. Finn Wolfhard is Canadian. Dan Aykroyd are Canadian. Ivan Reitman is Canadian. Why does that matter? Sony might, might, be able to claim this as Canadian content and recieve more tax breaks.

Filming is New York is pricey. That's where GB16 filmed. You have New York hotels, New York unions, New York crew. I've been to both New York and Calgary. And one thing I can tell you with insane certainty? 10 dollars will get you waaaaaay more in Calgary than 10 dollars in New York.

One thing I can tell you for sure: GB20 is going to be a helluva lot more intimate than GB16. Unless things have drastically changed from a few months ago, and they may have, the VFX bidding had less than 750 shots estimate. (Now that might've been just for a single vendor or the entire movie).

I haven't read a script or anything close to that but here's a clue that, based on what I was told/saw, might or might not tell you something. Again, if everything's stayed the same, here's the last thing I'll say:

Violet.

Get excited ladies and gents and strap yourselves in. The next few months may prove interesting.
Interesting stuff! Just a slight point to say GB16 only did a few inserts in New York itself, (Aerial shots, Columbia, Firehouse and the Drive-bys) it was mainly filmed in and around Boston. Your point remains absolutely correct, but GB16 avoided New York as much as possible for similar reasons!
Sav C liked this
User avatar
By csullivan1980
#4919451
As excited as I am about GB20 I am approaching with extreme caution. After ATC I am still butt hurt. It is exciting to hear Murray will be back BUT I will believe it when it see it. He hasn’t always seemed to be one to embrace the franchise even for ATC.

Like some other people I feel he’ll be a cameo or maybe even have a Han Solo moment like Harrison Ford did in The Force Awakens (death by proton pack?).

I’m holding all judgment until I actually see the movie.
back liked this
User avatar
By timeware
#4919454
Chris hemmsworth basically Admitted there wasn't a script in an interview so I'm crossing the streams this is going to be more organized. I do hope that the gb's get an undeathery send off.
RichRyan1507 liked this
User avatar
By Doctor Venkman
#4919457
I haven't read a script or anything close to that but here's a clue that, based on what I was told/saw, might or might not tell you something. Again, if everything's stayed the same, here's the last thing I'll say:

Violet.

Get excited ladies and gents and strap yourselves in. The next few months may prove interesting.
Interesting...
Sav C liked this
By Dr.D
#4919459
For those who weren't able to attend Fan Fest, there was a moment where I feel like Ivan Reitman beautifully and unintentionally summed up the difference between 84 and 2016 and the fatal flaw that dragged ATC down.

After screening a few of the dailies, Jason was asking Ivan about why these jokes which seemed great were cut. Ivan said that the process of making Ghostbusters was filled with small moments like that. The problem is that if you run with every single joke the movie becomes too crowded. He talked about how the movie will get away from you if you try to go for joke after joke. While I admit he was only speaking in generalities, I think it was a brilliant summation of what the real difference between the two movies is. Honestly, Ivan Reitman doesn't get the credit he deserves for knowing how to use some of the greatest comedy voices of the day in the most effective manner. He knew focusing on the humanity of the characters was the key of the movie, not forcing every single joke.

Example of what I mean: for those who say it I point to the "If we wanted nerve gas, we'd make it ourselves" line from Harold. On its own it's hysterical, but think about the context of that scene. The Mayor's office is one of the more straight scenes in the movie. We know the threat of Gozer is serious because the Ghostbusters are treating it as such. If they were cracking one-liners during that entire scene we as an audience don't feel the weight of the threat and therefore the is very little tension. Yeah there's jokes at the top of the scene, but most of it is played straight. Having Egon crack a joke like that would distract the audience from the core of the scene. On the opposite end of that sits ATC, which relied far too heavily on improvised gags. The difference is most of the jokes in ATC we're totally unconnected to anything related to what was going on. Feig's lightly directed improve style works really well for grounded, real comedies but it just doesn't work for the material.

All of this is to say, Jason Reitman is a director who is defined by his grounded, slice-of-life approach to storytelling. In no universe does he give us anything like ATC, not to kick the dead horse again.
RichRyan1507, One time, deadderek and 2 others liked this
By RichardLess
#4919462
The smaller budget has nothing to do with cast. I work in the Canadian film industry and filming in Calgary Vs filming in NYC, even with tax incentives, is waaaay cheaper. The Canadian dollar is lower than the American dollar. So everytime you spend X amount of money on X amount of crew and supplies, you get X amount of dollars back. Also. Jason Reitman is Canadian. Finn Wolfhard is Canadian. Dan Aykroyd are Canadian. Ivan Reitman is Canadian. Why does that matter? Sony might, might, be able to claim this as Canadian content and recieve more tax breaks.

Filming is New York is pricey. That's where GB16 filmed. You have New York hotels, New York unions, New York crew. I've been to both New York and Calgary. And one thing I can tell you with insane certainty? 10 dollars will get you waaaaaay more in Calgary than 10 dollars in New York.

One thing I can tell you for sure: GB20 is going to be a helluva lot more intimate than GB16. Unless things have drastically changed from a few months ago, and they may have, the VFX bidding had less than 750 shots estimate. (Now that might've been just for a single vendor or the entire movie).

I haven't read a script or anything close to that but here's a clue that, based on what I was told/saw, might or might not tell you something. Again, if everything's stayed the same, here's the last thing I'll say:

Violet.

Get excited ladies and gents and strap yourselves in. The next few months may prove interesting.
Interesting stuff! Just a slight point to say GB16 only did a few inserts in New York itself, (Aerial shots, Columbia, Firehouse and the Drive-bys) it was mainly filmed in and around Boston. Your point remains absolutely correct, but GB16 avoided New York as much as possible for similar reasons!
Boston! Yeah that's my bad. Thanks for the correction
robbritton liked this
User avatar
By One time
#4919464
For those who weren't able to attend Fan Fest, there was a moment where I feel like Ivan Reitman beautifully and unintentionally summed up the difference between 84 and 2016 and the fatal flaw that dragged ATC down.

After screening a few of the dailies, Jason was asking Ivan about why these jokes which seemed great were cut. Ivan said that the process of making Ghostbusters was filled with small moments like that. The problem is that if you run with every single joke the movie becomes too crowded. He talked about how the movie will get away from you if you try to go for joke after joke. While I admit he was only speaking in generalities, I think it was a brilliant summation of what the real difference between the two movies is. Honestly, Ivan Reitman doesn't get the credit he deserves for knowing how to use some of the greatest comedy voices of the day in the most effective manner. He knew focusing on the humanity of the characters was the key of the movie, not forcing every single joke.

Example of what I mean: for those who say it I point to the "If we wanted nerve gas, we'd make it ourselves" line from Harold. On its own it's hysterical, but think about the context of that scene. The Mayor's office is one of the more straight scenes in the movie. We know the threat of Gozer is serious because the Ghostbusters are treating it as such. If they were cracking one-liners during that entire scene we as an audience don't feel the weight of the threat and therefore the is very little tension. Yeah there's jokes at the top of the scene, but most of it is played straight. Having Egon crack a joke like that would distract the audience from the core of the scene. On the opposite end of that sits ATC, which relied far too heavily on improvised gags. The difference is most of the jokes in ATC we're totally unconnected to anything related to what was going on. Feig's lightly directed improve style works really well for grounded, real comedies but it just doesn't work for the material.

All of this is to say, Jason Reitman is a director who is defined by his grounded, slice-of-life approach to storytelling. In no universe does he give us anything like ATC, not to kick the dead horse again.
Agree 100%. You have to really know what you are doing to cut out: " I came, I saw, I came again."

The way Jason and Ivan were with each other at fanfest was so heartwarming. I'm completely confident that we will finally have the GB'84 sequel we (some of us) have been waiting for for 35 years.
RichRyan1507 liked this
By Dr.D
#4919465
Couldn't agree more. I was at worst cautiously optimistic before Fan Fest. But honestly, seeing the genuine emotion Ivan and Jason have for not just Ghostbusters but for each other was the kind of rare humanity you don't often seen in the entertainment industry. There is an indescribable feeling I got while watching the two of them discuss storytelling. There is a genuine humanity coming from both of them as they describe this project and seeing Ivan Reitman get choked up had me misty eyed as well.

We aren't just getting ANOTHER Ghostbusters. We're getting something special.
deadderek liked this
User avatar
By Slimered
#4919466

We'll definitely get that. After Ghostbusters: Answer The Call didn't make back its budget this film is going to give us a lot of what people were asking for before Answer The Call. Sony won't want to risk not making a profit again on a lucrative franchise like this one. It's probably also why they are going for a much smaller budget, and kids as part of the main cast rather than the 'Ben Stiller + other famous comedy actors' route.
The smaller budget has nothing to do with cast. I work in the Canadian film industry and filming in Calgary Vs filming in NYC, even with tax incentives, is waaaay cheaper. The Canadian dollar is lower than the American dollar. So everytime you spend X amount of money on X amount of crew and supplies, you get X amount of dollars back. Also. Jason Reitman is Canadian. Finn Wolfhard is Canadian. Dan Aykroyd are Canadian. Ivan Reitman is Canadian. Why does that matter? Sony might, might, be able to claim this as Canadian content and recieve more tax breaks.

Filming is New York is pricey. That's where GB16 filmed. You have New York hotels, New York unions, New York crew. I've been to both New York and Calgary. And one thing I can tell you with insane certainty? 10 dollars will get you waaaaaay more in Calgary than 10 dollars in New York.

One thing I can tell you for sure: GB20 is going to be a helluva lot more intimate than GB16. Unless things have drastically changed from a few months ago, and they may have, the VFX bidding had less than 750 shots estimate. (Now that might've been just for a single vendor or the entire movie).

I haven't read a script or anything close to that but here's a clue that, based on what I was told/saw, might or might not tell you something. Again, if everything's stayed the same, here's the last thing I'll say:

Violet.

Get excited ladies and gents and strap yourselves in. The next few months may prove interesting.
I wouldn't say the cast has 'nothing' to do with the smaller budget. Hiring kid actors instead of famous current comedy actors is undeniably going to cost less, and therefore will have reduced the budget significantly. It also means they are more limited with the filming schedule when it comes to shots involving the child actors due to how kids are only allowed to work a certain length of time.

But yeah, it might not be a deliberate decision to lower the budget.

The 'Violet' clue is interesting. Maybe there's a ghost flower? Or florist?
  • 1
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 157

Really spoilerish. https://www.reddit.com/r/g[…]

Just checking out the PS4 pre-order page and it&rs[…]

Crix

Update. I have received my order after a few extra[…]

https://fandomwire.com/2019/08/20/marvel-sony-stil[…]