Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).

[Cyke101]

With the thread title change I'm not sure if it's now only supposed to be about the casting or not. Anyway, Paul Feig had this to say on the most recent episode of The Talking Dead.

I'm very inspired by this show (The Walking Dead), because what I love is how they play with the danger, they play with the scariness, but also the idea that it's always about gauntlet running. And that's something -- an element I want to bring to this 'Ghostbusters' reboot is just having to get through these various obstacles that are supernatural and all that.

I'm not quite sure what to make of that but I do like that he's thinking of what to do with the Ghostbusters beyond just bringing the funny.

That's more or less why I watched the cartoon (though I doubt Feig ever did). The Real Ghostbusters wouldn't go up against escalating threats or anything like that -- the show came well before serialization was a common thing -- but kept going up against more and more creative challenges. A good chunk of the time, they weren't even fighting ghosts; they went up against threats like demons, vampires, even evil human criminals. Seeing them fighting different obstacles was just great.

And what's up with this Access Hollywood calls it "Ghostbusters 2"! I wonder if that's just rude or ignorant?

http://www.accesshollywood.com/ghos...i-feed-off-of-the-walking-dead_article_104615

It's Access Hollywood -- they're not even the smartest entertainment reporters, and that's already a small, shallow pool.

 

[Owain Taggart]

I can't remember where, but I do recall Feig saying he wanted to emphasize more horror out of the horror/comedy.

If that's the case, I might have to be out. Nothing against the director, but I just don't like horror. I do hope he balances it out properly. The original movies were never about being scary.They were more about the reactions of an outnumbered team under these situations, however incompetent they were at it.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I can't remember where, but I do recall Feig saying he wanted to emphasize more horror out of the horror/comedy.

If that's the case, I might have to be out. Nothing against the director, but I just don't like horror. I do hope he balances it out properly. The original movies were never about being scary.They were more about the reactions of an outnumbered team under these situations, however incompetent they were at it.

I think I have to disagree there. I think it is false that the original film was never about being scary, because it did have one or two serious frights. Dana getting captured was pretty scary, when the arms came out of her chair. What that scene wasn't, though, was extended, gratuitous, or the rule, and it certainly wasn't gory or truly horrifying.

 

[Cyke101]

I can't remember where, but I do recall Feig saying he wanted to emphasize more horror out of the horror/comedy.

If that's the case, I might have to be out. Nothing against the director, but I just don't like horror. I do hope he balances it out properly. The original movies were never about being scary.They were more about the reactions of an outnumbered team under these situations, however incompetent they were at it.

As a kid, I appreciated (but was very much terrified) by those horror scenes because that made the Ghostbusters that much bigger. The scarier something was, the more hope the heroes would bring -- and I think the crowd of New Yorkers cheering them on when they face Gozer, with religious leaders of all faiths praying while government forces and civilians alike are pretty much huddled together in fear.

For me, it got to be where, every time I watched a supernatural horror movie, I would hide under the sheets and think to myself, "If only the Ghostbusters were here!"

 

[Awesome Possum]

I can't remember where, but I do recall Feig saying he wanted to emphasize more horror out of the horror/comedy.

If that's the case, I might have to be out. Nothing against the director, but I just don't like horror. I do hope he balances it out properly. The original movies were never about being scary.They were more about the reactions of an outnumbered team under these situations, however incompetent they were at it.

I think I have to disagree there. I think it is false that the original film was never about being scary, because it did have one or two serious frights. Dana getting captured was pretty scary, when the arms came out of her chair. What that scene wasn't, though, was extended, gratuitous, or the rule, and it certainly wasn't gory or truly horrifying.

There needs to be a balance, something the second movie didn't quite pull off as well. Most of the ghosts were scary like the Grey Lady, the Terror Dogs and the Taxi ghost. Really only Slimer and The Stay Puft Marshmellow Man are goofy looking and Stay Puft is supposed to be a mascot, but becomes increasingly scary as he gets angry.

 

[Owain Taggart]

I think I have to disagree there. I think it is false that the original film was never about being scary, because it did have one or two serious frights. Dana getting captured was pretty scary, when the arms came out of her chair. What that scene wasn't, though, was extended, gratuitous, or the rule, and it certainly wasn't gory or truly horrifying.

But those scenes served their purpose by emphasizing just how out of their element they were. There's a difference to creating scenes full of tension and going flat out horror. Those scenes were full of tension mingled with absurdity, full of "Oh shit!" moments. All of it contributed to that epic feeling it had. I'll agree that it wasn't gory or horrifying, but again, that's precisely because of the balance. They never went too far one way, and there was always something to break the tension like their wisecracks. The director saying he wants to go more for the horror worries me that he might miss the mark.

I'm not saying horror doesn't have its place in the movies. It just needs to be balanced. But emphasizing horror over comedic elements would make me pass on it.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I think I have to disagree there. I think it is false that the original film was never about being scary, because it did have one or two serious frights. Dana getting captured was pretty scary, when the arms came out of her chair. What that scene wasn't, though, was extended, gratuitous, or the rule, and it certainly wasn't gory or truly horrifying.

But those scenes served their purpose by emphasizing just how out of their element they were. There's a difference to creating scenes full of tension and going flat out horror. Those scenes were full of tension mingled with absurdity, full of "Oh shit!" moments. All of it contributed to that epic feeling it had. I'll agree that it wasn't gory or horrifying, but again, that's precisely because of the balance. They never went too far one way, and there was always something to break the tension like their wisecracks. The director saying he wants to go more for the horror worries me that he might miss the mark.

I'm not saying horror doesn't have its place in the movies. It just needs to be balanced. But emphasizing horror over comedic elements would make me pass on it.

You said, the original film was "never about being scary." I was simply point out that that was, I believe, incorrect, full stop. I specifically qualified my remarks as being about that aspect of what you said, but I also went on to say that I didn't think the scenes I was talking about were "truly horrifying." FWIW, I think you had a basic point to start with, but then overstated it, by saying it was never scary.

For me, Ghostbusters never stepped into the horror genre beyond horror-lite.

But, any film that has an homage scene to The Exorcist, played straight, as Ghostbusters did, at least until Bill asked Sigourney to come down, is going at least that far.

 

[Cyke101]

I think I have to disagree there. I think it is false that the original film was never about being scary, because it did have one or two serious frights. Dana getting captured was pretty scary, when the arms came out of her chair. What that scene wasn't, though, was extended, gratuitous, or the rule, and it certainly wasn't gory or truly horrifying.

But those scenes served their purpose by emphasizing just how out of their element they were. There's a difference to creating scenes full of tension and going flat out horror. Those scenes were full of tension mingled with absurdity, full of "Oh shit!" moments. All of it contributed to that epic feeling it had. I'll agree that it wasn't gory or horrifying, but again, that's precisely because of the balance. They never went too far one way, and there was always something to break the tension like their wisecracks. The director saying he wants to go more for the horror worries me that he might miss the mark.

I'm not saying horror doesn't have its place in the movies. It just needs to be balanced. But emphasizing horror over comedic elements would make me pass on it.

You said, the original film was "never about being scary." I was simply point out that that was, I believe, incorrect, full stop. I specifically qualified my remarks as being about that aspect of what you said, but I also went on to say that I didn't think the scenes I was talking about were "truly horrifying." FWIW, I think you had a basic point to start with, but then overstated it, by saying it was never scary.

For me, Ghostbusters never stepped into the horror genre beyond horror-lite.

But, any film that has an homage scene to The Exorcist, played straight, as Ghostbusters did, at least until Bill asked Sigourney to come down, is going at least that far.

A little off-the-point, but for all of Venkman's snark and sarcasm throughout the movie, that one instance where he asked Dana to come down really humanized him to me, as it was one of the very few times where he wasn't joking; and I think Murray improvised that part, too.

 

[Amaris]

Agreed. Just to clarify, I don't think Feig wants to do pure horror, just that he wants to hit the right scare notes along with the comedy. It seems some people think this is going to be Bridesmaids: Ghostbusters Edition, or something, and I think he wants to dispel that notion.

 

[Cyke101]

Agreed. Just to clarify, I don't think Feig wants to do pure horror, just that he wants to hit the right scare notes along with the comedy. It seems some people think this is going to be Bridesmaids: Ghostbusters Edition, or something, and I think he wants to dispel that notion.

I've always wanted a scarier Ghostbusters -- there are times when the cartoon episodes and the video game itself had some very genuine thrills to it, but I agree, Feig would try to balance horror and comedy. It would be odd of him to hire four comedic actresses to do pure horror.

 

[BillJ]

Aykroyd still has hopes for his 'Ghostbusters III'

Oh I've written… well, we have…I've written, well, there's three drafts of the old concept that exists. And we're going to be able to salvage some of it and use it. Yeah, we're gonna be able to use it some day. Let's get this one made and that will reinvigorate the franchise and then we'll go on to maybe doing a more conventional third sequel as we were planning and another idea I have for it.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/19/akroyd-still-thinks-his-ghostbusters-3-might-get-made

Yeah, why not. I'd watch it.

Aykroyd may as well give it up. If the film is a success, they'll go with that cast for future iterations. If it bombs, Ghostbusters will quietly be put away for another 20 years.

 

[Cyke101]

Aykroyd still has hopes for his 'Ghostbusters III'

Oh I've written… well, we have…I've written, well, there's three drafts of the old concept that exists. And we're going to be able to salvage some of it and use it. Yeah, we're gonna be able to use it some day. Let's get this one made and that will reinvigorate the franchise and then we'll go on to maybe doing a more conventional third sequel as we were planning and another idea I have for it.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/02/19/akroyd-still-thinks-his-ghostbusters-3-might-get-made

Yeah, why not. I'd watch it.

Aykroyd may as well give it up. If the film is a success, they'll go with that cast for future iterations. If it bombs, Ghostbusters will quietly be put away for another 20 years.

During the SNL 40 celebration last week, Dan was hawking his skullhead brand vodka on national TV. Yes, it's his personal side business, but I thought it was kind of tacky; and it would've been a better venue for something GB related since the original and sheboot incarnations are SNL heavy.

Then again, that would probably backfire anyway since Dan's never been good on following up on his promises (there's been "new GB3 news" for well over a decade), plus he can't seem to advertise or market properly to begin with.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Agreed. Just to clarify, I don't think Feig wants to do pure horror, just that he wants to hit the right scare notes along with the comedy. It seems some people think this is going to be Bridesmaids: Ghostbusters Edition, or something, and I think he wants to dispel that notion.

I've always wanted a scarier Ghostbusters -- there are times when the cartoon episodes and the video game itself had some very genuine thrills to it, but I agree, Feig would try to balance horror and comedy. It would be odd of him to hire four comedic actresses to do pure horror.

Vigo scared the crap out of me in GB2. That's as horror as I'd ever want this shit to get!

 

[Awesome Possum]

Remember the Boogieman from The Real Ghostbusters? That face and that voice were nightmare fuel for me as a child.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I just read the most hilarious thing...now this is on IMDB so take it with a grain of salt, but apparently William Atherton called Ivan Reitman once and complained that playing Walter Peck ruined his life. People were starting bar fights with the poor guy just because of Peck!

Oh, and about Vigo: Max von Sydow dubbed all his dialogue. Did NOT know that.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I just read the most hilarious thing...now this is on IMDB so take it with a grain of salt, but apparently William Atherton called Ivan Reitman once and complained that playing Walter Peck ruined his life. People were starting bar fights with the poor guy just because of Peck!

Oh, and about Vigo: Max von Sydow dubbed all his dialogue. Did NOT know that.

On the commentary track they mentioned that he was in traffic and school bus pulled up beside him. All the kids saw him and started yelling "dickless".

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ His later role in Die Hard 2 probably didn't help much either.

 

[Awesome Possum]

^ His later role in Die Hard 2 probably didn't help much either.

Bio-Dome either, although he was great in it.

He did play Ders' father, Thor, on Workaholics and ended up being a pretty decent guy, although a little hard on his son at times.

 

[Owain Taggart]

You said, the original film was "never about being scary." I was simply point out that that was, I believe, incorrect, full stop. I specifically qualified my remarks as being about that aspect of what you said, but I also went on to say that I didn't think the scenes I was talking about were "truly horrifying." FWIW, I think you had a basic point to start with, but then overstated it, by saying it was never scary.

For me, Ghostbusters never stepped into the horror genre beyond horror-lite.

But, any film that has an homage scene to The Exorcist, played straight, as Ghostbusters did, at least until Bill asked Sigourney to come down, is going at least that far.

Right, Ok, I see what you're saying now. I actually agree. To that end, I hope the director understands the need for balance.

 

[Timby]

Right, Ok, I see what you're saying now. I actually agree. To that end, I hope the director understands the need for balance.

Paul Feig is a comedy writer and director and he has cast four comedians in lead roles. He's not making a horror film.