A
Amaris
Guest
Damage control for what? A movie that hasn't even come out yet? Jesus.
Ghostbusters 2016: Talk about the movie(s).
- Thread starter Frontier
- Start date
Audiences responded better to the trailers with mentions of the previous films because they weren't confused by said trailers.
Go read the article I posted earlier from The Verge where Feig talks about the subject.
Go read the article I posted earlier from The Verge where Feig talks about the subject.
A
Amaris
Guest
That doesn't make it damage control. It makes it research. "Hey, audiences like this better." "Okay, we'll do that."
Damage control implies that everything has gone horribly wrong and now it's being salvaged as best as possible. This is not the case for Ghostbusters.
^ Exactly.
A bad call is still a bad call. This was a very bad call. Especially the way it was implemented. It wasn't a simple mention of the previous films, it outright implied that it was a continuation of them.
I personally disagree with the decision that was made, but it wasn't made willy-nilly, and my own feelings on the matter don't matter.
Seriously. How can it be hard to accept it? Paul Feig's Ghostbusters features cameos from the original cast for clever nods. Because he's a comedy director and writer. We already know exactly what Aykroyd's scene is.
Just because it's a brand-new movie doesn't mean Feig is coming to everyone's homes and stealing all the copies of the original movies and putting them into a bonfire.
And for God's sake, the Ghostbusters 3 with the original cast died and had its last gasp in 1999 / 2000.
Just because it's a brand-new movie doesn't mean Feig is coming to everyone's homes and stealing all the copies of the original movies and putting them into a bonfire.
And for God's sake, the Ghostbusters 3 with the original cast died and had its last gasp in 1999 / 2000.
You live in a very weird world, as the one I live in doesn't have cause for, you know, even an ounce of that rant. Certainly not in the last page or two of posts.
A few people complained (and rightfully so) that the trailer is sending the wrong message. A couple others (rightfully) pointed out that there appears to be some temporal hijinks going on in at least one scene in the trailer, and then posited that it could mean that maybe the message isn't necessarily wrong and that perhaps the movie shifts either through different times or different dimensions/worlds, in one of which the events in the original movies might have occurred.
And then you come around ranting about Aykyrod and stealing people's VHS tapes and god knows whatever else you had in mind when you wrote that irrelevant drivel.
God forbid people discuss a sci-fi movie on a subforum dedicated to discussing sci-fi movies.
Last edited:
I think the idea of Ghosbusters 3 was one of those ideas that was nicer on paper. The execution would have been abysmal. There was no evidence that they were even interested in getting this thing off the ground, Murrary adamantly refused it, and Ramis seemed to be only half interested. I mean they got the writers of 'Year One' to turn out a draft? If they were really serious about it I think they'd put some better writers on it.
I am more than happy I am watching a trailer that feels like it has a real energy to it that a Ghostbusters 3 trailer would most likely be lacking.
I am more than happy I am watching a trailer that feels like it has a real energy to it that a Ghostbusters 3 trailer would most likely be lacking.
I pretty much consider the game Ghostbusters 3, and at this point it's probably the closest we'll ever get. It has all of the original Ghostbusters, Annie Potts, William Atherton, and even had Brian Doyle-Murray as the Mayor and Max Von Sydow as Vigo the Carpathian. Ackroyd and Ramis even did some work on the script.
Last edited:
I like this re-edit much better too. For me, the official trailer has unfunny jokes and cartoonish ghosts. As a big Ghostbusters fan, it left me disappointed. I hope the movie is much better. Hearing the theme song to the "Extreme Ghostbusters" (man, I hate that name) makes me wish they went with a continuation instead of a reboot. Dan Ackroyd can be the mentor to the new Ghostbusters. The new crew can look something like this (not exactly this), with both male and female characters, and more than one minority.
^ cast of scrubs
I agree.
Last edited:
Aykroyd.
...Sorry, just had to say it once to help make up for all the variations in this thread.
...Sorry, just had to say it once to help make up for all the variations in this thread.
As opposed to the cartoonishness of Slimer?
The cartoon set up the world quite well. Bizarre the filmmakers would want to re-start a whole bunch of exposition for the sequel. It should've been GB busting ghosts and then they had to deal with the lame painting Ghost. God I hated GB 2, it was sooo bad I'm happy there wasn't another one.
I thought MIB was the GB of the 90's, and that franchise as well couldn't muster a decent sequel. I still wish Linda Fiorentino and Will Smith continued the franchise; she was an appropriate duo for Smith I thought. Sigh, now here comes "MIB on 23rd Jump street."
I hate the term "sheboot".
Reboots with women in formerly male roles has been done before and didn't cause the world to end!
Reboots with women in formerly male roles has been done before and didn't cause the world to end!
I've read a lot of people completely hated the trailer, and Sony is trying to work another trailer to put a positive light on the new movie. I look forward to seeing more Melissa in the film.
I take no relish in saying this, but count me as one of those that hated it - and I'm in no way precious about the original movie or the franchise. That preview was simply devoid of promise, and the few jokes it did feature didn't amuse me one bit. I remain open-minded about the movie, though.
ETA: take the slapping scene at the end. The basic gag - the slap expels the ghost, but the slapper doesn't realize it, so she slaps again - is promising. A clever way to visualize that would have been to show the ghost get slapped downwards, right through the floor and into the room below. Cut to McCarthy moaning, which Jones misinterprets, so she slaps again. Funny. Not funny, however, is what we get: a distracting cut to outside the building, with a hugely obvious "the ghost is leaving leaving" effect, followed by McCarthy saying an obviously non-possessed, cliched "that's gonna hurt" line, followed by Jones slapping again.
Now, maybe that's the preview's fault, in that they garbled the footage for whatever reason. Happens all the time in previews, and maybe the movie version works much better. But that gag, as presented, is "ow, my balls!"-level garbage.
Last edited:
Similar threads
