RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,237
Posts: 5,348,024
Members: 24,611
Currently online: 538
Newest member: fxks323

TrekToday headlines

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

IDW Publishing Comic Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

A Baby For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23

Klingon Beer Arrives In The US
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Star Trek: Prelude To Axanar
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22

Abrams Announces Star Wars: Force For Change Sweepstakes
By: T'Bonz on Jul 22


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 21 2012, 02:55 PM   #286
Anwar
Vice Admiral
 
Anwar's Avatar
 
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

The cartoon had some good ideas that could be used for a movie, like the Peoplebusters.
Anwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 07:42 PM   #287
davejames
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Sac, Ca
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Donald Draper wrote: View Post
From what I have seen the hardcore fandom treats Ghostbusters as seriously as Star Trek fans do. Forgetting it is a comedy before anything else. I am guessing because they were kids when it came out. I am in that age group but now I see it for what it really was. I wonder if hardcore fans will be satisfied by anything new that is made. With or without Murray. Seeing a new movie as "too comedic"!
Sure, it's a comedy. But you still have to be able to take the threat seriously. The reason the first movie worked was because it DID have a bit of a dark edge to it (unlike the tame and family-friendly second movie), and had the characters going up against ghosts that were straight out of Poltergeist and the end of Raiders.

It's easy to laugh at those effects now, but I remember people jumping out of their seats all through that first movie.
davejames is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 08:16 PM   #288
Timby
GIVE ME YOUR FACE
 
Timby's Avatar
 
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

davejames wrote: View Post
(unlike the tame and family-friendly second movie)
People call the second film tame, and there are certainly some lighter elements to it than the first film, but it's fucking creepy at a lot of points, as well, and feels considerably darker: In Ghostbusters, Dana sees a dog in her fridge roaring at her. In Ghostbusters II, her baby is almost shoved in front of a speeding bus, her bathtub tries to eat her and then Janosz in drag steals her baby.

I've said before that Ecto-1A is the avatar for the confused, tonally discordant mess that Ghostbusters II is, both lighter and darker at the same time.
Timby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 08:21 PM   #289
Kelthaz
Rear Admiral
 
Kelthaz's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Right, even in comedies villains tend to be (and I think should be) scary and threatening. That's not say that comedy villains need to be on the level of the TNG-Borg or the Shadows, but even No Heart in Care Bears was a legitimate threat with the power to do ... whatever he was trying to do. Was he trying to take over the world or something? Make people unhappy?

Anyway, despite Ghostbusters being a comedy, Gozer was a serious threat with the power to destroy the world and he needed to be for the movie to work. If the villain had been The Box Ghost from Danny Phantom the film would have lost something very important.
__________________
"Who are you?! And how did you get in here?!"

"I'm the locksmith. And... I'm the locksmith."
Kelthaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 08:37 PM   #290
Dick Whitman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Behind the mask of Donald Draper
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Umm and what form did Gozer take? Oh yeah, that super scary Pillsbury Doughboy parody called the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man....

Give me a break! Yeah at certain points towards the build up to the climax the movie takes a slightly serious tone. But the payoff is a giant Marshmallow Man! Which deliberately undermines any pretense of seriousness that came before.

Ghostbusters is as Campy as the 1960s Batman tv series. Where the characters are played straight and serious to underline the absurdity of the situations they are in.
Dick Whitman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 08:57 PM   #291
Kelthaz
Rear Admiral
 
Kelthaz's Avatar
 
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Silly is not mutually exclusive with serious. Sure, the giant Marshmallow Man was hilarious, but would you want to get stepped on by it? I think not.
__________________
"Who are you?! And how did you get in here?!"

"I'm the locksmith. And... I'm the locksmith."
Kelthaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 10:29 PM   #292
Reverend
Rear Admiral
 
Reverend's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

For the record, when I first saw 'Ghostbusters' I was petrified by the library ghost and actually had nightmares of a terror dog coming up the stairs to get me...of course I was only 4 at the time...

And yes, I agree that part of what made the first film work so well was the lightning-in-a-bottle mix of humour, genuine suspense and an almost timeless art design. The sequel (which I do actually have a soft spot for) was on the other hand very much of it's time and not nearly as well balanced. It's by no means a *bad* film in it's own right though. I'm seen much worse comedies and much much MUCH worse sequels.
Reverend is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 10:38 PM   #293
Timby
GIVE ME YOUR FACE
 
Timby's Avatar
 
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Reverend wrote: View Post
It's by no means a *bad* film in it's own right though. I'm seen much worse comedies and much much MUCH worse sequels.
Ghostbusters II isn't necessarily bad, it's just ... aggressively mediocre, and it never really transcends its material. It's essentially a beat-for-beat remake of the original film with some different faces, and ultimately ends up feeling like the money-driven cash-in that it is.

That's why I'd much rather see a remake / reboot than another sequel. I'm incredibly excited by everything I've seen / heard about Jose Padilha's upcoming remake of RoboCop (the original being one of my favorite films), because it sounds like they're really doing something interesting with the property and taking it in some new directions, as opposed to just repeating the beats of the original. A Ghostbusters III that trots out four fat guys in their 60s as a cursory nostalgia bone to the fans ... the idea really doesn't do anything for me, and I think it runs a very big risk of becoming unintentional self-parody.

Twenty years ago, I could have seen there being grounds for one last adventure with the guys, because Ramis and Aykroyd hadn't completely lost the plot by then, and Ramis and Murray were still on speaking terms. But then Groundhog Day happened, and ... welp.
Timby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 21 2012, 11:18 PM   #294
Dick Whitman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Behind the mask of Donald Draper
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I have read about the Groundhog Day disagreements. It amazes me that this created such a long term contention between them. Regardless of their different personal visions, the movie is widely considered a classic. Its not like it was a dud that they are trying to blame the other for its failure.
Dick Whitman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 05:50 AM   #295
B.J.
Rear Admiral
 
B.J.'s Avatar
 
Location: Huntsville, AL, USA
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Donald Draper wrote: View Post
Umm and what form did Gozer take? Oh yeah, that super scary Pillsbury Doughboy parody called the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man....
Nit: "The Destructor" was the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. Gozer was the super model with the flat top. Two separate characters.
__________________
B.J. --- bj-o23.deviantart.com
B.J. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 05:31 PM   #296
Reverend
Rear Admiral
 
Reverend's Avatar
 
Location: UK
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

B.J. wrote: View Post
Donald Draper wrote: View Post
Umm and what form did Gozer take? Oh yeah, that super scary Pillsbury Doughboy parody called the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man....
Nit: "The Destructor" was the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. Gozer was the super model with the flat top. Two separate characters.
Nit the Nit: No, actually Gozer *was* the destructor. Louis/Vinz went into this earlier in the film. It even calls itself "Gozer the Destructor."

Regardless, I find it interesting how strait the reveal of Stay Puft is played and how it never seems *too* silly (only a bit silly.) That's that delicate balance I mentioned before. It shouldn't work, but it does. Buggered if I know how.
Reverend is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 06:38 PM   #297
Owain Taggart
Rear Admiral
 
Owain Taggart's Avatar
 
Location: Northern Ontario, Canada
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

I think things can still be a threat and be taken seriously even when something isn't absolutely bone chilling scary, at least to the viewer. In-universe, that thing was scary, no bones about it, and it did pose a threat. Remember, it could have even been worse as it had manifested itself by thought. Could have been a giant flaming bag of ... well, gotta be careful about those thoughts
Owain Taggart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 07:06 PM   #298
Timby
GIVE ME YOUR FACE
 
Timby's Avatar
 
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Donald Draper wrote: View Post
I have read about the Groundhog Day disagreements. It amazes me that this created such a long term contention between them. Regardless of their different personal visions, the movie is widely considered a classic. Its not like it was a dud that they are trying to blame the other for its failure.
It went deeper than "disagreements," though. They had protracted, drawn-out, nasty fights both on and off the set, and in addition to their visions of the film (Ramis co-wrote the thing and knew it was a comedy; Murray wanted to play it as some sort of existential drama -- I kind of understand why he loves working with Wes Anderson, now), both men got personal. Ramis supposedly brought up Murray's well-known infidelity and drug use in at least one argument, and Murray got even nastier. And then after Murray was done on the set, he went up to Ramis and said, "I have nothing more to say to you."

It's really an incredibly happy accident that Groundhog Day turned out to be such an amazing and beautiful film, given that its director and star were fighting like feral cats at every turn.

Reverend wrote: View Post
Regardless, I find it interesting how strait the reveal of Stay Puft is played and how it never seems *too* silly (only a bit silly.) That's that delicate balance I mentioned before. It shouldn't work, but it does. Buggered if I know how.
Ramis and Reitman call it the domino theory of reality, which is to say that if you're slowly introducing more and more weird shit, then the audience can accept a hundred-foot-tall marshmallow man. Reitman isn't a particularly talented director, but he's very good at giving you something patently ridiculous, then stepping back and saying, "Deal with it."
Timby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 07:56 PM   #299
Rarewolf
Rear Admiral
 
Rarewolf's Avatar
 
Location: Devon, England
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Timby wrote: View Post
davejames wrote: View Post
(unlike the tame and family-friendly second movie)
People call the second film tame, and there are certainly some lighter elements to it than the first film, but it's fucking creepy at a lot of points, as well, and feels considerably darker: In Ghostbusters, Dana sees a dog in her fridge roaring at her. In Ghostbusters II, her baby is almost shoved in front of a speeding bus, her bathtub tries to eat her and then Janosz in drag steals her baby.
Add the idea of a painting that really is watching you and Ray's possession.

I only saw the 2nd one at the cinema, but I have always had a preference for it. I'm not really a comedy film person though.
__________________
"Weaselling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals - except the weasels" Homer Jay Simpson
Rarewolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 22 2012, 10:08 PM   #300
davejames
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Sac, Ca
Re: Aykroyd Comments on Murray, Ghostbusters 3! Working on Script w/Ra

Owain Taggart wrote: View Post
I think things can still be a threat and be taken seriously even when something isn't absolutely bone chilling scary, at least to the viewer. In-universe, that thing was scary, no bones about it, and it did pose a threat. Remember, it could have even been worse as it had manifested itself by thought. Could have been a giant flaming bag of ... well, gotta be careful about those thoughts
Agreed. As silly as Stay Puft looked, it was still clear that there was something much more dark and evil underlying it.
davejames is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
ghostbusters

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.