Ghostbusters trailer *Brand New* (2016)

[thecolorsblend]

Take for instance the new Han Solo movie. I'm a diehard OT Star Wars fan, but even I think this movie is a waste of time and money.

At the risk of getting lost in the weeds (eg, specifically about Star Wars) and missing your broader point (eg, Hollywood is a cesspool of cheap marketing gimmicks masquerading as cinema), I must say that as time goes on I really do think Disney owning Star Wars was a horrible move.

First, there's the creative angle. You touched on that already. But it bears emphasizing that this new crop of Star Wars movies has left me utterly cold. There are reasons for that which detract from the point. So I'll skip them. Suffice it to say though, I bow to nobody when it comes to loving the original trilogy. And I just can't get into these new movies.

Second, I've truly come to believe that Disney is the evil empire. Apart from the theme parks, there's very little of the wider Disney universe that I enjoy. Or approve of. Their ownership of Star Wars has been detrimental. But still profitable. For now.

But it's like anything. The public's appetite for Star Wars had been building for decades. I doubt the totality of the new movies' success is due to their creative merits. As much as anything, I attribute it to pent-up demand. For better or worse, Lucasfilm only produced six Star Wars movies even though the franchise was manifestly capable of supporting more movies than that. Right now, people are "getting their fix".

But the day will come (and at the rate Disney is going, it'll be very soon) when they've gotten their fix. After that, Star Wars will be just another big film franchise in a sea of clones and competitors. Disney won't be able to get away with half-assed stories and creative poverty anymore. Sooner or later, they'll have to sink or swim.

And if their creative decisions up to now are anything to judge by, it'll be Star Wars that sinks. Disney, meanwhile, will just assume the public is over their fascination with Star Wars (partly true) and then go look for another property to crash into an iceberg.

[Azrael]

Fanservice checklist; professionaly produced studio-budgeted fanfic; the filmic equivalent of the old EU; fanarts (one can't deny the new footage of Vader, Tie Fighters, Star Destroyers, space battles, is good). Not bad but not Lucas.

[The Joker]

Dan Aykroyd once said the game is the third film that we're never going to get.

The plot managed to connect parts 1 and 2 altogether through various nods, and ultimately, it's about as good as a GB3 is going to get. Dan spent about 20+ years trying to get a GB3 made, and with Bill Murray being aloof, and Harold Ramis dying, it's clear that Hollywood views the franchise as a "Bill Murray series", or simply does not care about GB. Or both.

As it currently stands, whatever the hell the 2016 version was titled, "Ghostbusters", "Ghostbusters: Answer the Call", or "Ghostbusters: Don't answer the call, and run away from the theater screaming for your life", it's a black eye on the franchise. I'm not sure where the animated GB film stands, or the Ecto Force animated series. I vaguely recall something about a supposed live action show being planned as well. I suppose any of these, in order to just lessen the bad taste from 2016, would be fine, but what got shat out last year by Hollywood's agenda pushing arse, clearly, wasn't the way to go. 

I mean, 40 million just for reshoots? Because Feig is that incompetent.

That's the budget for John Wick 2.

Yeah the whole movie.

[riddler]

Dan Aykroyd once said the game is the third film that we're never going to get.

The plot managed to connect parts 1 and 2 altogether through various nods, and ultimately, it's about as good as a GB3 is going to get. Dan spent about 20+ years trying to get a GB3 made, and with Bill Murray being aloof, and Harold Ramis dying, it's clear that Hollywood views the franchise as a "Bill Murray series", or simply does not care about GB. Or both.

As it currently stands, whatever the hell the 2016 version was titled, "Ghostbusters", "Ghostbusters: Answer the Call", or "Ghostbusters: Don't answer the call, and run away from the theater screaming for your life", it's a black eye on the franchise. I'm not sure where the animated GB film stands, or the Ecto Force animated series. I vaguely recall something about a supposed live action show being planned as well. I suppose any of these, in order to just lessen the bad taste from 2016, would be fine, but what got shat out last year by Hollywood's agenda pushing arse, clearly, wasn't the way to go. 

I mean, 40 million just for reshoots? Because Feig is that incompetent.

That's the budget for John Wick 2.

Yeah the whole movie.

I'm sure there are youtube videos of the cutscreens of the video game making it into a movie. And the plot is decent enough that there's enough there into making an animated movie out of the cutscreens. As Akroyd said, that is the closest we'll ever see to a GB3 because we'll never see Hudson and Murray suit up without Harold Ramis.

Take this for what it's worth but I've read from multiple sources stated that part of the agreement between Marvel and Sony on Spider-man Homecoming was that Feig would be denied any involvement after April 2017.

[Silver Nemesis]

Out of fear of being labelled a misogynist, Aykroyd has now clarified his comments with the following statement:

"Paul Feig made a good movie and had a superb cast and plenty of money to do it. We just wish he had been more inclusive to the originators."

So the originators should have had more involvement? That's exactly what the fans have been saying since day one, and Aykroyd labelled us KKK members for doing so. I'm afraid loss of creative input is the price of selling out, Dan

As for Paul Feig, Hollywood's biggest misandrist – for some reason whenever I think about him this song pops into my head:

Not to go off topic with the politics, but I would just like to point out that Hillary Clinton tacitly endorsed the Ghostbusters remake when she appeared alongside the cast on the Ellen DeGeneres show. Meanwhile Donald Trump condemned the movie from the get go. Now I'm not saying that was the decisive factor in last year's presidential election, but... Actually, no, that is what I'm saying.

Second, I've truly come to believe that Disney is the evil empire. Apart from the theme parks, there's very little of the wider Disney universe that I enjoy. Or approve of. Their ownership of Star Wars has been detrimental. But still profitable. For now.

I'll always like Disney's classic films. I loved watching them as a child. And now I've got a three-year-old nephew and a ten-month-old niece, I enjoy revisiting the classics in their company. But the golden age of Disney creativity has long passed. Even in the late 70s and early 80s they were producing live action films like The Black Hole and Tron. Not great movies per se, but fun imaginative popcorn flicks that were suitable for family viewing and which retain a certain charm even in 2017. But today, what does Disney produce? Live action remakes of their animated movies, Pirates of the Caribbean, Marvel and Star Wars films. Touchtone and Pixar are the only divisions doing anything new, and even the latter is getting bogged down in sequelitis.

Say what you will about Uncle Walt, but the man understood art. He was a businessman, yes, but he also understood the creative process needed to make good films. The same is true of George Lucas. Sure, he merchandised the hell out of Star Wars. He was out to make money. But he also wanted to tell a story. The heart of the OT began with one man's vision. The end product wasn't solely down to Lucas, and others must be acknowledged for their contributions. But the starting point, the core of the OT, was one artist's desire to express himself. The core of the recent Star Wars films is a bunch of lawyers and market research analysts trying to figure out ways of making money off something they didn't create.

Just to clarify, I don't begrudge people enjoying films like Transformers or Pirates of the Caribbean. My mother works at a primary school, and she was telling me the other day that lots of the kids – children who weren't even born when the first Bayformers film was released – really love the character of Bumblebee. And that's fine. I grew up loving G1 Transformers and had one of the original Bumblebee toys back in the late eighties. There's nothing wrong with enjoying commercial franchise movies once in a while, including Marvel and DC films. But I don't think those types of picture should constitute the totality of a studio's ambition.

Filmmaking has to be commercial to sustain itself, but it shouldn't be commercial to the complete exclusion of artistry. There has to be a balance. And wasting $144 million remaking Ghostbusters is the wrong way to go about it. Imagine if they'd taken that money and financed ten smaller films based on original concepts. Some of them might well have sucked, but I'll bet at least a few would have been good. One of them might even have spawned a new franchise. But then why risk creating a new IP when you can leech off an old one?

Anyway, what's Sony doing making movies in the first place? They should be manufacturing Blu-ray players in Chinese sweatshops, not accelerating the artistic decline of an entire medium.

But the day will come (and at the rate Disney is going, it'll be very soon) when they've gotten their fix. After that, Star Wars will be just another big film franchise in a sea of clones and competitors. Disney won't be able to get away with half-assed stories and creative poverty anymore. Sooner or later, they'll have to sink or swim.

And if their creative decisions up to now are anything to judge by, it'll be Star Wars that sinks. Disney, meanwhile, will just assume the public is over their fascination with Star Wars (partly true) and then go look for another property to crash into an iceberg.

Like I say, I do like the recent Star Wars films (because I'm a corporate shill who'll buy anything with the Star Wars logo on it). I enjoyed The Force Awakens and Rogue One and thought they were both fun, well made films. But the Original Trilogy was so much more than that. It was magic. And that magic is never going to be recaptured. I'd love to be proven wrong on this point, but I don't think I will be. If any upcoming Star Wars film stands a chance of coming close to the OT, it'll be The Last Jedi. Rian Johnson did a good job with Brick (2005) and Looper (2012), and of all the writers and directors involved in the future of this series, I reckon he's the one with the best chance of injecting some originality.

I'm less enthusiastic about Colin Trevorrow helming Episode IX; Safety Not Guaranteed (2012) was a decent indie flick, but Jurassic World (2015) was a bland spectre of Spielberg's 1993 original. If The Last Jedi is good, it'll stave off cynicism until the Han Solo flick. But if Episode VIII turns out to be a remake of Episode V, and fails to transcend the baseline of mediocrity that audiences have come to expect, then I imagine the tide will turn against Lucasfilm within the next twelve months.

Fanservice checklist; professionaly produced studio-budgeted fanfic; the filmic equivalent of the old EU; fanarts (one can't deny the new footage of Vader, Tie Fighters, Star Destroyers, space battles, is good). Not bad but not Lucas.

That about sums it up.

I mean, 40 million just for reshoots? Because Feig is that incompetent.

That's the budget for John Wick 2.

Yeah the whole movie.

And people will still be enjoying John Wick long after Feigbusters has become an embarrassing footnote on Dan Aykroyd's career. The John Wick films stemmed from an original screenplay, had a combined budget of $70 million (half the cost of Ghostbusters 2016) and earned a combined revenue of over $250 million (more than Ghostbusters 2016). They're proof that investing in something new can yield greater profit than rehashing old properties.

I'm sure there are youtube videos of the cutscreens of the video game making it into a movie. And the plot is decent enough that there's enough there into making an animated movie out of the cutscreens. As Akroyd said, that is the closest we'll ever see to a GB3 because we'll never see Hudson and Murray suit up without Harold Ramis.

Yep. The game was the true conclusion to the franchise. Now Ghostbusters should be allowed to rest in peace.

I already posted this earlier in the thread, but it's probably my favourite video on the subject so I'll post it again.

[Silver Nemesis]

[The Laughing Fish]

The original Ghostbusters franchise is getting a new film in 2020

Fire up your proton packs, people, because there's going to be another Ghostbusters movie from Sony Pictures, according to Entertainment Weekly. Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You For Smoking) will direct the new film, which will be set in the same fictional universe as the 1984 original and its sequel—unlike Paul Feige's 2016 all-female Ghostbusters.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/01/a-new-ghostbusters-film-is-in-the-works-set-in-the-original-universe/

I didn't know Reitman directed Thank You For Smoking. I liked that movie, Aaron Eckhardt plays a great douchebag in it.

As for this news, I think it's come two decades late. A third movie should've been made in the early 90s, when Harold Ramis was at his peak. It's a shame that Ramis and Bill Murray had a falling out.

[thecolorsblend]

At the risk of getting lost in the weeds (eg, specifically about Star Wars) and missing your broader point (eg, Hollywood is a cesspool of cheap marketing gimmicks masquerading as cinema), I must say that as time goes on I really do think Disney owning Star Wars was a horrible move.

First, there's the creative angle. You touched on that already. But it bears emphasizing that this new crop of Star Wars movies has left me utterly cold. There are reasons for that which detract from the point. So I'll skip them. Suffice it to say though, I bow to nobody when it comes to loving the original trilogy. And I just can't get into these new movies.

Second, I've truly come to believe that Disney is the evil empire. Apart from the theme parks, there's very little of the wider Disney universe that I enjoy. Or approve of. Their ownership of Star Wars has been detrimental. But still profitable. For now.

But it's like anything. The public's appetite for Star Wars had been building for decades. I doubt the totality of the new movies' success is due to their creative merits. As much as anything, I attribute it to pent-up demand. For better or worse, Lucasfilm only produced six Star Wars movies even though the franchise was manifestly capable of supporting more movies than that. Right now, people are "getting their fix".

But the day will come (and at the rate Disney is going, it'll be very soon) when they've gotten their fix. After that, Star Wars will be just another big film franchise in a sea of clones and competitors. Disney won't be able to get away with half-assed stories and creative poverty anymore. Sooner or later, they'll have to sink or swim.

And if their creative decisions up to now are anything to judge by, it'll be Star Wars that sinks. Disney, meanwhile, will just assume the public is over their fascination with Star Wars (partly true) and then go look for another property to crash into an iceberg.

I totally forgot that I wrote all this. At the time that I wrote that stuff, I was thinking that Star Wars would sink like a stone in 2020 or some time after.

I wasn't expecting to be proven right in just one year. And yet, here we are.

[The Joker]

The original Ghostbusters franchise is getting a new film in 2020

Fire up your proton packs, people, because there's going to be another Ghostbusters movie from Sony Pictures, according to Entertainment Weekly. Jason Reitman (Juno, Thank You For Smoking) will direct the new film, which will be set in the same fictional universe as the 1984 original and its sequel—unlike Paul Feige's 2016 all-female Ghostbusters.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/01/a-new-ghostbusters-film-is-in-the-works-set-in-the-original-universe/

I didn't know Reitman directed Thank You For Smoking. I liked that movie, Aaron Eckhardt plays a great douchebag in it.

As for this news, I think it's come two decades late. A third movie should've been made in the early 90s, when Harold Ramis was at his peak. It's a shame that Ramis and Bill Murray had a falling out.

Just for fun on a "what if", now there's question! Bill Murray and Harold Ramis basically had a falling out following Groundhog's Day, correct? So WHAT IF that movie had never been made? Would we have got a GB3 during the mid-late 1990s? Would you take the gamble on that trade?

On to the new topic of discussion ... Honestly, I want to believe. I really do. Things appear to be moving along fairly quickly, and Jason Reitman comes across like a guy who's actually passionate about the franchise, and wants to do right by course correcting, rather than pushing AGENDAS and such. There's obviously alot of hurdles to overcome, and alot of damage to address, but I don't know. Maybe. Maybe... Perhaps it's just me wanting to have just a slight glimmer of hope following successful revivals like Cobra Kai, Rocky/Creed, & Halloween. I agree that with Ramis having since passed on, and this GB3 not exactly being in the ideal time frame, but I would like to think there's something worthwhile there.

I'm just not too confident about that right now.

[The Laughing Fish]

Just for fun on a "what if", now there's question! Bill Murray and Harold Ramis basically had a falling out following Groundhog's Day, correct? So WHAT IF that movie had never been made? Would we have got a GB3 during the mid-late 1990s? Would you take the gamble on that trade?

It was only a day ago I found out from a friend that Ramis and Murray fell out during production of Groundhog Day. Who knows, maybe it was only a matter of time before their friendship would turn sour. But would it be worth swapping Groundhog Day for Ghostbusters 3? That's a hard question to ask for me, I reckon that Groundhog Day is a classic. And let's face it, most comedy sequels aren't a great follow-up of the prequel. Look at the consensus for Ghostbusters II. I enjoy it, but it seems to be the most forgotten comedy sequel ever made. I had to remind my supervisor at work about that movie because he had mistaken the remake as the second movie of the franchise.