independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Thu 21st Mar 2019 2:37am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > General Discussion > Ghostbusters 3!!!
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 01/19/19 4:58pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

Ghostbusters 3!!!

Ivan Reitman's son Jason will be directing a sequel to the original movies for 2020! Too bad Ramis isn't with us anymore.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 01/20/19 12:57am

Hudson

avatar

He's directed some great films I love: Thank You For Smoking and Juno.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 01/20/19 1:02am

EmmaMcG

avatar

I'm very excited about this. Even if Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd and Ernie Hudson don't come back to reprise their roles, just by setting the movie in the original Ghostbusters universe, it should be enough to bury any memory of that shit all-female ghostbusters (it doesn't deserve a capital G).

Jason Reitman is definitely the "right man" for the job. If anyone is going to take a Ghostbusters movie seriously, it's him. Plus, he was actually in Ghostbusters 2.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 01/20/19 6:37am

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

I'm very excited about this. Even if Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd and Ernie Hudson don't come back to reprise their roles, just by setting the movie in the original Ghostbusters universe, it should be enough to bury any memory of that shit all-female ghostbusters (it doesn't deserve a capital G). Jason Reitman is definitely the "right man" for the job. If anyone is going to take a Ghostbusters movie seriously, it's him. Plus, he was actually in Ghostbusters 2.


There's no way Aykroyd would skip it. Probably the same with Hudson. Bill Murray is the one to wonder about.

Jason should be great. After all, he was the self-professed "first Ghostbusters fan". biggrin

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 01/20/19 10:54am

EmmaMcG

avatar

djThunderfunk said:



EmmaMcG said:


I'm very excited about this. Even if Bill Murray, Dan Ackroyd and Ernie Hudson don't come back to reprise their roles, just by setting the movie in the original Ghostbusters universe, it should be enough to bury any memory of that shit all-female ghostbusters (it doesn't deserve a capital G). Jason Reitman is definitely the "right man" for the job. If anyone is going to take a Ghostbusters movie seriously, it's him. Plus, he was actually in Ghostbusters 2.


There's no way Aykroyd would skip it. Probably the same with Hudson. Bill Murray is the one to wonder about.

Jason should be great. After all, he was the self-professed "first Ghostbusters fan". biggrin



I'm sure Dan Ackroyd would do it if he's asked. That man would go to the opening of an envelope. Whether he's asked or not is a different story. As I understand it, it will be a different, younger cast.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 01/21/19 1:36am

DaveT

avatar

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.

www.filmsfilmsfilms.co.uk - The internet's best movie site!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 01/21/19 5:21am

EmmaMcG

avatar

DaveT said:

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.



I never minded the IDEA of the all female cast. After all, I would personally love to be a Ghostbuster. But when I seen who was directing and who had been cast, my enthusiasm was completely killed for it. Not one of them are funny. Not one. And the best thing Paul Feig ever did was appear in Sabrina The Teenage Witch as a teacher. And even in that he was an annoying little prick.

This new movie is already a step up from that last travesty. Jason Reitman is the perfect choice to direct. Even if he had no history with the series, he'd still be a great choice. It will be interesting to see who the cast will be and if there'll be any links to the previous movies. I know they said it's set in the same universe as the two real Ghostbusters movies but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll be getting Pete Venkman and co chasing down a "focused, non-terminal repeating phantasm" or a class 5 full roaming vapor (AKA Slimer).
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 01/21/19 11:01am

kewlschool

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

DaveT said:

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.

I never minded the IDEA of the all female cast. After all, I would personally love to be a Ghostbuster. But when I seen who was directing and who had been cast, my enthusiasm was completely killed for it. Not one of them are funny. Not one. And the best thing Paul Feig ever did was appear in Sabrina The Teenage Witch as a teacher. And even in that he was an annoying little prick. This new movie is already a step up from that last travesty. Jason Reitman is the perfect choice to direct. Even if he had no history with the series, he'd still be a great choice. It will be interesting to see who the cast will be and if there'll be any links to the previous movies. I know they said it's set in the same universe as the two real Ghostbusters movies but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll be getting Pete Venkman and co chasing down a "focused, non-terminal repeating phantasm" or a class 5 full roaming vapor (AKA Slimer).

I did not see the remake. Yet, Melissa McCarthy is the jewel of comedy acting. She is perfection in Bridesmaids, The Heat and on SNL. Some of her movies aren't that great-that is due to script/direction etc. She brings the best out of any script. For me she is the first iconic female comedy actor who stands equal with all the past comedy legends: Gleason, Pryor, Murray, etc.

99.9% of everything I say is strictly for my own entertainment
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 01/21/19 11:55am

EmmaMcG

avatar

kewlschool said:



EmmaMcG said:


DaveT said:

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.



I never minded the IDEA of the all female cast. After all, I would personally love to be a Ghostbuster. But when I seen who was directing and who had been cast, my enthusiasm was completely killed for it. Not one of them are funny. Not one. And the best thing Paul Feig ever did was appear in Sabrina The Teenage Witch as a teacher. And even in that he was an annoying little prick. This new movie is already a step up from that last travesty. Jason Reitman is the perfect choice to direct. Even if he had no history with the series, he'd still be a great choice. It will be interesting to see who the cast will be and if there'll be any links to the previous movies. I know they said it's set in the same universe as the two real Ghostbusters movies but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll be getting Pete Venkman and co chasing down a "focused, non-terminal repeating phantasm" or a class 5 full roaming vapor (AKA Slimer).

I did not see the remake. Yet, Melissa McCarthy is the jewel of comedy acting. She is perfection in Bridesmaids, The Heat and on SNL. Some of her movies aren't that great-that is due to script/direction etc. She brings the best out of any script. For me she is the first iconic female comedy actor who stands equal with all the past comedy legends: Gleason, Pryor, Murray, etc.



That's funnier than anything she's ever done.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 01/21/19 12:04pm

StrangeButTrue

avatar

The she-make was not terrible. People are crazy opinionated. It was a fun movie with fun nods to the original for the real fans.

.

The new one will need one man to succeed. And this man is Rick Moranis. Rick is the Keymaster. Rick, Signourney, and Annie would be perfect. The original GBs can rest on their laurels. Oscar + Louis & Janine's kid + 2 other dudes is all we need.

.

if it was just a dream, call me a dreamer 2
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 01/21/19 3:30pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

StrangeButTrue said:

The she-make was not terrible. People are crazy opinionated. It was a fun movie with fun nods to the original for the real fans.


.


The new one will need one man to succeed. And this man is Rick Moranis. Rick is the Keymaster. Rick, Signourney, and Annie would be perfect. The original GBs can rest on their laurels. Oscar + Louis & Janine's kid + 2 other dudes is all we need.


.




The "she-make" wasn't terrible. It was fucking awful. Not one funny moment and the special effects were better in the original. How can a movie released in 1984 have better visual effects than a movie released in 2016? I mean, the shitty writing, TV movie style directing and horrible over-acting is to be expected from a Paul Feig movie. But to be beaten on effects by a 32 year old movie? That's embarrassing.

I'm with you on Rick Moranis though. Even if it's just a cameo, just having him onscreen would be an instant win.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 01/21/19 5:15pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

How can a movie released in 1984 have better visual effects than a movie released in 2016?


Practical special effects are better than CGI. Compare "The Thing" from 1982 to "The Thing" from 2011.

"I've made up my mind. Don't try to confuse me with the facts." - Harry J. Anslinger
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 01/21/19 9:17pm

tump

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0082450/

Ghostbusters 3? Too late. This idiot has ruined the brand completely.

If there were awards for most brain-dead, unfunny script, he'd win hands-down. If he can get a movie made in Hollywood, any dickhead can. Good thing the studio got $0.00 from my 50% viewing of the movie. I couldn't stomach watching the rest.

If this is what passes for a feel-good flick, I am on the wrong planet.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 01/21/19 10:22pm

Hudson

avatar

I've never seen a Ghostbusters movie, but I know it isn't as great as the 80s nostalgia turds claim.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 01/22/19 12:20am

EmmaMcG

avatar

Hudson said:

I've never seen a Ghostbusters movie, but I know it isn't as great as the 80s nostalgia turds claim.


Well I wasn't even alive in the 80s and I think it's great. One of the best comedy movies ever, in fact. And since I've seen it and you haven't, I have more authority on the subject than you do.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 01/22/19 12:51am

Hudson

avatar

I am not proud of that post. It was my lashing out at comments that weren't even on the org. What do you think the very best comedies of all time are?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 01/22/19 1:30am

DaveT

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

StrangeButTrue said:

The she-make was not terrible. People are crazy opinionated. It was a fun movie with fun nods to the original for the real fans.

.

The new one will need one man to succeed. And this man is Rick Moranis. Rick is the Keymaster. Rick, Signourney, and Annie would be perfect. The original GBs can rest on their laurels. Oscar + Louis & Janine's kid + 2 other dudes is all we need.

.

The "she-make" wasn't terrible. It was fucking awful. Not one funny moment and the special effects were better in the original. How can a movie released in 1984 have better visual effects than a movie released in 2016? I mean, the shitty writing, TV movie style directing and horrible over-acting is to be expected from a Paul Feig movie. But to be beaten on effects by a 32 year old movie? That's embarrassing. I'm with you on Rick Moranis though. Even if it's just a cameo, just having him onscreen would be an instant win.


And lest we forget that horrendous rock band scene with Ozzy "SHARON!" Osbourne ... that wouldn't have been funny 15 years ago when The Osbournes reality show was actually on TV, now its just pure desperation.

That was the point I looked at my missus in the cinema and asked if we should leave; we both wanted to but stayed just to see how bad it would get. Kind of glad we did because I don't think I'd have believed how bad the CGI splurg, lets use the ghost from the Ghostbusters logo finale was unless I'd witnessed it with my own eyes.

www.filmsfilmsfilms.co.uk - The internet's best movie site!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 01/22/19 2:31am

purplethunder3
121

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

EmmaMcG said:

How can a movie released in 1984 have better visual effects than a movie released in 2016?


Practical special effects are better than CGI. Compare "The Thing" from 1982 to "The Thing" from 2011.

Never saw The Thing 2011 or the last Ghostbusters movie. Glad I didn't. Bring on GB 3 if it stands up to the first two originals!

Related image

"Music gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination and life to everything." --Plato
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 01/22/19 2:33am

EmmaMcG

avatar

Hudson said:

I am not proud of that post. It was my lashing out at comments that weren't even on the org. What do you think the very best comedies of all time are?


Haha, no worries. We've all been guilty of that.

It would be impossible for me to list what I consider the best because I'm bound to forget some. But off the top of my head I'd say Trading Places, Coming To America, Ghostbusters, Airplane, The Naked Gun, Caddyshack, Planes Trains and Automobiles, Uncle Buck, Scrooged, Friday, Groundhog Day and City Slickers. There are probably loads in forgetting but that's a fairly accurate list of what I consider the best comedies.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 01/22/19 2:36am

EmmaMcG

avatar

DaveT said:



EmmaMcG said:


StrangeButTrue said:

The she-make was not terrible. People are crazy opinionated. It was a fun movie with fun nods to the original for the real fans.


.


The new one will need one man to succeed. And this man is Rick Moranis. Rick is the Keymaster. Rick, Signourney, and Annie would be perfect. The original GBs can rest on their laurels. Oscar + Louis & Janine's kid + 2 other dudes is all we need.


.




The "she-make" wasn't terrible. It was fucking awful. Not one funny moment and the special effects were better in the original. How can a movie released in 1984 have better visual effects than a movie released in 2016? I mean, the shitty writing, TV movie style directing and horrible over-acting is to be expected from a Paul Feig movie. But to be beaten on effects by a 32 year old movie? That's embarrassing. I'm with you on Rick Moranis though. Even if it's just a cameo, just having him onscreen would be an instant win.


And lest we forget that horrendous rock band scene with Ozzy "SHARON!" Osbourne ... that wouldn't have been funny 15 years ago when The Osbournes reality show was actually on TV, now its just pure desperation.

That was the point I looked at my missus in the cinema and asked if we should leave; we both wanted to but stayed just to see how bad it would get. Kind of glad we did because I don't think I'd have believed how bad the CGI splurg, lets use the ghost from the Ghostbusters logo finale was unless I'd witnessed it with my own eyes.



I actually did leave during the movie. Its the only movie I've ever walked out on. I saw the whole movie afterwards when my cousin downloaded it and it was worse than I remembered it being. They even fucked up the car.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 01/22/19 4:28am

TheFman

Not sure why this needs to be 'revamped' again, it was good as it was. The song is legendary and I hold my heart for the 'modern' version of it.
For a real 80's teenager as myself, the only way that this can work is to bring the original cast back and give the whole story a twist (no old man chasing ghosts but old man doing what old man do and involve the ghosts in a funny story)

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 01/22/19 9:00am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Ray, you didn't sleep with it did you??

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 01/22/19 10:03am

EmmaMcG

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Ray, you didn't sleep with it did you??



It's always the quiet ones.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 01/22/19 5:03pm

RodeoSchro

avatar

Hudson said:

I am not proud of that post. It was my lashing out at comments that weren't even on the org. What do you think the very best comedies of all time are?



No worries! My favorite comedies of all time are (pretty much in order, at least through the top 5):

1. Animal House
2. Caddyshack
3. Stripes
4. This Is Spinal Tap
5. Airplane
6. Blazing Saddles
7. Blades of Glory
8. Dodgeball
9. Vacation
10. The Jerk
11. The Blues Brothers
12. Bad Moms

Second Funkiest White Man in America

P&R's paladin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 01/22/19 7:41pm

Hudson

avatar

In no particular order mine would be:

About a Boy
The Blues Brothers
My Cousin Vinny
Planes, Trains and Automobiles
The Owl and the Pussycat
Bridesmaids
Tootsie
Office Space
Fargo
Young Frankenstein
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 01/25/19 11:21am

Se7en

avatar

EmmaMcG said:

DaveT said:

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.

I never minded the IDEA of the all female cast. After all, I would personally love to be a Ghostbuster. But when I seen who was directing and who had been cast, my enthusiasm was completely killed for it. Not one of them are funny. Not one. And the best thing Paul Feig ever did was appear in Sabrina The Teenage Witch as a teacher. And even in that he was an annoying little prick. This new movie is already a step up from that last travesty. Jason Reitman is the perfect choice to direct. Even if he had no history with the series, he'd still be a great choice. It will be interesting to see who the cast will be and if there'll be any links to the previous movies. I know they said it's set in the same universe as the two real Ghostbusters movies but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll be getting Pete Venkman and co chasing down a "focused, non-terminal repeating phantasm" or a class 5 full roaming vapor (AKA Slimer).


I never minded the idea of a female cast either. I was intrigued by the casting of Kristin Wiig (more of a subtle humor) and Kate McKinnon (more of a goofball humor). When I saw that they were casting Melissa McCarthy and Leslie Jones -- both of whom are just loud, slapstick humor -- I became disinterested.

I only saw the movie when it was offered free on VUDU.

It wasn't that they were women that was horrible. It was the humor itself. Making Chris Hemsworth the equivalent of a dumb blonde/sex symbol, maybe would've been interesting for another movie but not Ghostbusters.

I actually wouldn't mind if the remake was a "bit" scarier than the other ones.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 01/26/19 7:46am

SPYZFAN1

The only good thing about the 2016 remake was seeing the Ernie Hudson cameo....and "The Owl And The Pussycat" film RULES.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 01/27/19 3:23pm

EmmaMcG

avatar

Se7en said:



EmmaMcG said:


DaveT said:

Can't be any worse than the 2016 effort ... that was an absolute turd! Nothing to do with the ladies, I thought they were cast well ... but they got screwed over big time with the script they were given.

So sad they never got this off the ground before Ramis passed. Wonder if the family would be up for having him appear in ghost form? ... that would be quite cool.



I never minded the IDEA of the all female cast. After all, I would personally love to be a Ghostbuster. But when I seen who was directing and who had been cast, my enthusiasm was completely killed for it. Not one of them are funny. Not one. And the best thing Paul Feig ever did was appear in Sabrina The Teenage Witch as a teacher. And even in that he was an annoying little prick. This new movie is already a step up from that last travesty. Jason Reitman is the perfect choice to direct. Even if he had no history with the series, he'd still be a great choice. It will be interesting to see who the cast will be and if there'll be any links to the previous movies. I know they said it's set in the same universe as the two real Ghostbusters movies but that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll be getting Pete Venkman and co chasing down a "focused, non-terminal repeating phantasm" or a class 5 full roaming vapor (AKA Slimer).


I never minded the idea of a female cast either. I was intrigued by the casting of Kristin Wiig (more of a subtle humor) and Kate McKinnon (more of a goofball humor). When I saw that they were casting Melissa McCarthy and Leslie Jones -- both of whom are just loud, slapstick humor -- I became disinterested.

I only saw the movie when it was offered free on VUDU.

It wasn't that they were women that was horrible. It was the humor itself. Making Chris Hemsworth the equivalent of a dumb blonde/sex symbol, maybe would've been interesting for another movie but not Ghostbusters.

I actually wouldn't mind if the remake was a "bit" scarier than the other ones.



Well nothing sums up my feelings on the 2016 ghostbusters movie better than that.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 01/27/19 5:15pm

SoulAlive

I agree.This silly trend of remaking/revamping old movies needs to stop.To me,Ghostbusters is truly an 80s thing.Do we really need a 2020 reboot? smh

TheFman said:

Not sure why this needs to be 'revamped' again, it was good as it was.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 01/28/19 12:04pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Viggs, mr Viggooo

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > General Discussion > Ghostbusters 3!!!