Ghostbusters movie by Paul Feig

Re: Ghostbusters 3


this about sums it up. funny how the kevin smith reaction auto plays after that.
rule of thumb. don't trust anyone's opinion from hollywood. they generally don't like to disagree with each other.

I still think it would have been far more challening to do a shot for shot remake. Recreate EVERYTHING...just use new actors. then you could use bill murray as walter peck. or Dan Aykroyd as the mayor. Or Ernie hudson as Jack Hardemeyer. Shoot one and two back to back and release them at the same time. THEN you go forward. sure we'd still be annoyed that it's a re imagining rather than a sequel, but it would show respect to the originals, and be in the EXACT same universe.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Vivek said:

So if they had said they are making a new Ghostbusters film with new characters and didn't mention anything else.

And two months later if they announced the female cast names, they would have been accepted more graciously by the fans? And the casting choice would not be accused as being a gimmick then?

Yeah, I find that hard to believe. The outrage would have been far more severe and mean spirited.

Click to expand...

Two things:
1) Look where you are. Yes, we do value story here over the typical Hollywood method of "make the poster first, then we can bang out a script over the weekend."

2) I know you didn't mean to (or at least I'm assuming it) but you're basically accusing me of something not in evidence here. I can speak only for myself, but I wouldn't have been bothered by it. You don't really have to believe me, but if you choose not to...assume that my response was edited for language.

But I can give, as evidence, the fact that this is not the first time this board has taken issue with a movie that clearly put the optics ahead of the story. By the way, it's not like this is the far reaches of 4chan or something. There may be exceptions, but by and large my experiences here have not been that this board is a bastion of woman hating kkk members who think only white men should ever be in any movie ever ever ever. At this point, I really DO feel like pretending that the distaste is because it's women and not because it's a fundamental change to four time loved characters is to completely misread months, if not years worth of discussions here.


edit: I should restate as well, that I DONT know it will be bad, only that it's gimmicky. The original kind of was too, but it was able to overcome the gimmicks with some truly world class talent. Maybe this one has that talent as well, but if so, none of the people involved have ever displayed it before now. The odds are simply not in it's favor. Also not for nothing, but an Early-years SNL pedigree is an entirely different thing than a current-years SNL pedigree. For me, personally, it's as different as the comparison between someone who starred in a hit movie and someone who starred in the ice capades version. Just not really the same category of 'proving ground' for being able to make a gimmicky idea fly, and the gimmick of "But they are girls!" is simply MUCH more obvious and eye-roll worthy than the original gimmick of the 4 idiots making a go of it in spite of the man trying to keep them down. You really do have a higher bar, with less talented jumpers trying to get over it.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

All I know is, I already went through one year of a fan base arguing, splitting, and being torn apart from within, with for and against. Michael Bay killing all hope for modern TMNT to be good after he runs it through the mud was disheartening enough. first you have the new fanbase brought in by Bay, seeking out message boards with the old fan base....and then the clashes start. you have 85% of the old fan base hating the new stuff....and the new fan base refusing to look a the old stuff because 'it's only considered good through nostalgia'.

Now it's happening again with ghostbusters. and to make maters worse, some idiot started the sexism angle somewhere...so now we can no longer just dislike the idea because the idea sucks in general...without being thought of as sexists first.

being a fan of things has gotten less fun as the decade has waned on.....it's just alot more work, and not in a good way. I've had to stop following a few ghostbuster related FB pages because the lines area already being drawn....and if I wanted to watch an hour of arguing, I'd just tune into the view.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

saying that people who don't like this idea for ghostbusters because they are sexist is like saying people who didn't like Red Tails didn't like it because they are racist. No, it was just a very poorly made film. This is just another example of lazy film making. hey, I'll do Top Gun only this time with all Female pilots. I'm a film visionary........

Re: Ghostbusters 3

NeilT said:

I still think it would have been far more challening to do a shot for shot remake. Recreate EVERYTHING...just use new actors. then you could use bill murray as walter peck. or Dan Aykroyd as the mayor. Or Ernie hudson as Jack Hardemeyer. Shoot one and two back to back and release them at the same time. THEN you go forward. sure we'd still be annoyed that it's a re imagining rather than a sequel, but it would show respect to the originals, and be in the EXACT same universe.

Click to expand...

Now that is a thing I would find gimmicky. A shot for shot remake? We saw how well that worked for Psycho.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

AJTaliesen said:

2) I know you didn't mean to (or at least I'm assuming it) but you're basically accusing me of something not in evidence here. I can speak only for myself, but I wouldn't have been bothered by it.

Click to expand...

That's fair enough. I made the hypothetical scenario based on your statement, but the context of the outcome was in relation to the fan reaction in general and nothing was directed at you.

AJTaliesen said:

You don't really have to believe me, but if you choose not to...assume that my response was edited for language.

Click to expand...

Ha..okay, well played . I do believe you.

When we say Ghostbusters, for most people it's the four original characters played by the male actors. Announcing that they are making a new Ghostbusters movie would naturally lead most people to consider it's along similar lines. Till the day they made the first announcement I always assumed it was going to be a sequel. The current cast names now didn't come off as a surprise to me cause it's known for sometime now that it's going to be a reboot with female cast.

I guess the announcement of the cast regardless of whether they are female or male is now making the reboot a reality for most fans. The backlash might be intended towards the reboot aspect itself, while the disdain is currently driven by the announcement of the cast.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Paul Andrew said:

Now that is a thing I would find gimmicky. A shot for shot remake? We saw how well that worked for Psycho.

Click to expand...

perhaps...but i'd rather see that than what we're getting.....especially if sony possibly thinks the original actors are to old to move ahead with a sequel.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Vivek said:

I guess the announcement of the cast regardless of whether they are female or male is now making the reboot a reality for most fans. The backlash might be intended towards the reboot aspect itself, while the disdain is currently driven by the announcement of the cast.

Click to expand...

The more I think about it, the more I feel like this is actually whats bothering me more than anything. Sometimes things need a reboot. I wouldn't mind another Superman reboot if it was actually a fun movie (don't want to start anything, if you like the current ones good for you. It's just not my taste).

But Ghostbusters just didn't need a reboot, and none of the original characters needed changing. If anything, they had a strange mix of gritty and innocence that was only possible in the 80's and just couldn't be done now.

A sequel as a new franchise would've gone down smoother for me. In my opinion you don't even need Murray or Ramis for that. Just have Dan Aykroyd and Ernie Hudsen and have them mirror the truth by saying something like "Egon passed away, and Venkman sold his share and now does whiskey commercials in Japan or something."

In the context of your last post, I almost feel bad for these women now, because in my case at least, they may be taking heat for something that has nothing to do with them: the plain fact that I think a reboot is a crap idea.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Jeyl said:

The 80s tended to lean more towards male leads/heroes? Oh my god! So much has changed!

Marvel Cinematic Universe List:

1. Iron Man (Male Lead)
2. The Incredible Hulk (Male Lead)
3. Iron Man 2 (Male Lead)
4. Thor (Male Lead)
5. Captain America: The First Avenger (Male Lead)
6. The Avengers (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
7. Iron Man 3 (Male Lead)
8. Thor: The Dark World (Male Lead)
9. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Male Lead)
10. Guardians of the Galaxy (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
    
    *MARVEL MOVIES STARRING A BUFFED WHITE GUY NAMED CHRIS COMBO!*
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
12. Ant-Man (Male Lead)
13. Captain America: Civil War (Male Lead)
14. Doctor Strange: (Male Lead)
15. Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
16. Thor: Ragnarok (Male Lead)
17. Black Panther (Male Lead)
18. Avengers: Infinity War Part 1 (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
19. Captain Marvel HOLY #$!* A FEMALE LEAD CHARACTER!!!!!!!

And that's only if Captain Marvel is lucky. The film may not even be about her just like the Transformers movies weren't about the freaking Transformers.

Granted I don't know who the characters will be in the third and fourth Avengers movie or who will take the center stage of the story, but there will be a central character. Does anyone really need convincing that Tony Stark is the focus of every Avenger movie? Robert's name is the only name that goes before the freaking title. Maybe a female character will be the lead in the next Avengers movie after Age of Ultron.... But I highly doubt it because Kevin Keige believes that turning female characters into McGuffins, stuffing them into fridges, being man-handled around and knocked out constantly more than vindicates them of any gender bias.

Ren, you need to get a broader perspective on the problems of gender bias in the entertainment industry because this crap is going on strong in almost every medium.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing Jeyl you aren't a Marvel fan, so in the interests of equality let's not forget to balance this out with a look at the DCCU and Television series:
Superman x 6
Batman and its many sequels
Aquaman - pending
Justice League - pending
Suicide Squad - pending
Arrow
Flash
Smallville

I completely agree with you and I'm very aware of the gender bias in modern cinema and only used the 80s as an example given that we are talking about a re-invention of the Ghostbusters which was brought to the mainstream through the two films made and released in the 80s.
The problem really lies with the portrayal of a strong female lead in modern media and the lack of any strong characters, films aimed at the female audience tend to focus on issues which don't have a universal appeal and female characters seem to fall on the "problems with guys" stereotype.

Agent Carter is doing her bit to give a strong female lead and it is executive produced by two great female writers who happened to produce one of my other favourite TV series, Reaper.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

What is truly sexist here?

It's weak if they think they have to use previously established franchise with male characters and established funny men to leverage off of to show some girl power in the comedy fantasy realm isn't it?

Rather.. take the risk and try to create a new creative comedy fantasy franchise that stands on it's own with female characters. Gasp.
I know, scary. Especially to studio execs I bet.

Nobody here would be griping I can assure. It's the hijacking of GB people are bent about.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

CessnaDriver said:

What is truly sexist here?

It's weak if they think they have to use previously established franchise with male characters and established funny men to leverage off of to show some girl power in the comedy fantasy realm isn't it?

Rather.. take the risk and try to create a new creative comedy fantasy franchise that stands on it's own with female characters. Gasp.
I know, scary. Especially to studio execs I bet.

Nobody here would be griping I can assure. It's the hijacking of GB people are bent about.

Click to expand...

and the fact that some people can't see that and have to turn it into an agenda (again, just look at some of the FB comments on GB related pages by some women, and some men) amazes me. why sexism is even being brought up at all...and not the fact that the original four GUYS are not in it...is not so much mind boggling as it is super annoying. although, funny enough, I can't help but wonder if it IS an agenda by amy at sony to make it an all female comedy this time around. she seems to be the mastermind behind all this.

probably shouldn't post this because someone will probably take it the wrong way..but... I saw a post on another FB group by someone who was pointing out other things we could get upset about in a humorous matter. he said something along the lines of '#2....anyone notice that there is still only one black person? I guess having ladies is progressive enough'.... heh. from the tim meadows 'because i'm black craig' craig ferguson style of comedy ;o).

Re: Ghostbusters 3

renaissance_man said:

Agent Carter is doing her bit to give a strong female lead and it is executive produced by two great female writers who happened to produce one of my other favourite TV series, Reaper.

Click to expand...

Yeah Agent Carter is doing great. Reaper was another hilarious ghost hunting show done right, but too bad it got canceled during second season.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Vivek said:

Yeah Agent Carter is doing great. Reaper was another hilarious ghost hunting show done right, but too bad it got canceled during second season.

Click to expand...

True, loved Reaper, have it on DVD, but it was about TWO GUYS... HOW SEXIST! :facepalm

Re: Ghostbusters 3

I was trying to think of who, knowing how hollywood works, would get cast if they tried to straight reboot it using guys.

Will Farrel? Andy Samberg? Tracy Morgan? Maybe even Ashton Kutcher?

Suddenly this all female cast doesn't sound so bad.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

AJTaliesen said:

I was trying to think of who, knowing how hollywood works, would get cast if they tried to straight reboot it using guys.

Will Farrel? Andy Samberg? Tracy Morgan? Maybe even Ashton Kutcher?

Suddenly this all female cast doesn't sound so bad.

Click to expand...

I agree there, those choices would be terrible.

- - - Updated - - -

Cephus said:

True, loved Reaper, have it on DVD, but it was about TWO GUYS... HOW SEXIST! :facepalm

Click to expand...

Even worse, it was actually THREE GUYS Sam, Ben and Sock.:devil

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Cephus said:

True, loved Reaper, have it on DVD, but it was about TWO GUYS... HOW SEXIST! :facepalm

Click to expand...

surprised anyone remembers reaper. all the stuff I like tends to get cancelled early. one reason why I stopped watching TV.
doesn't bode well for agent carter either.

although for casting, you could go the marvel route. Hawk for Winston, Captain America for Ray. Maybe Jarvis for Egon. Iron Man for Peter...

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Jeyl said:

The 80s tended to lean more towards male leads/heroes? Oh my god! So much has changed!

Marvel Cinematic Universe List:

1. Iron Man (Male Lead)
2. The Incredible Hulk (Male Lead)
3. Iron Man 2 (Male Lead)
4. Thor (Male Lead)
5. Captain America: The First Avenger (Male Lead)
6. The Avengers (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
7. Iron Man 3 (Male Lead)
8. Thor: The Dark World (Male Lead)
9. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (Male Lead)
10. Guardians of the Galaxy (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
    
    *MARVEL MOVIES STARRING A BUFFED WHITE GUY NAMED CHRIS COMBO!*
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
12. Ant-Man (Male Lead)
13. Captain America: Civil War (Male Lead)
14. Doctor Strange: (Male Lead)
15. Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
16. Thor: Ragnarok (Male Lead)
17. Black Panther (Male Lead)
18. Avengers: Infinity War Part 1 (Male Lead with dominate male cast)
19. Captain Marvel HOLY #$!* A FEMALE LEAD CHARACTER!!!!!!!

And that's only if Captain Marvel is lucky. The film may not even be about her just like the Transformers movies weren't about the freaking Transformers.

Granted I don't know who the characters will be in the third and fourth Avengers movie or who will take the center stage of the story, but there will be a central character. Does anyone really need convincing that Tony Stark is the focus of every Avenger movie? Robert's name is the only name that goes before the freaking title. Maybe a female character will be the lead in the next Avengers movie after Age of Ultron.... But I highly doubt it because Kevin Keige believes that turning female characters into McGuffins, stuffing them into fridges, being man-handled around and knocked out constantly more than vindicates them of any gender bias.

Ren, you need to get a broader perspective on the problems of gender bias in the entertainment industry because this crap is going on strong in almost every medium.

Click to expand...

Not a very valid argument there, Jeyl, considering that everything you listed is a pre-existing IP that was adapted or is being adapted for the big screen. I'd wager that the current MCU would have collapsed and never have gotten the success that it's gotten if they were to have gender bended some or all of the roles and changed any number of the male characters into female.

While there haven't been that many female dominated action movies since the '80s I'd argue that there have been more movies centered around or featuring strong women in their cast. Of course, lately Hollywood has been reboot/remake and sequel happy and many of those properties don't feature women and so they try not to screw with things too much more by gender bending the roles.

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Riceball said:

so they try not to screw with things too much more by gender bending the roles.

Click to expand...

unless you are michael bay, and then burnadette thompson is perfectly ok ;o)

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Wes R said:

I agree with Art, it's not even being gimmicky it's political correctness out of control. What's worse is none of these women are funny, it's going to be a movie full of raunchy jokes that is an insult to the original and the actors. They could have worked an all female team in without a reboot: one of the comics features a female team that's the competition but then works with the Ghostbusters.

Click to expand...

going back and reading some older posts. and I know i'm going to repeat on what i and others have already said..but... the IDW comics GET IT RIGHT. they even did a kind of reboot joke where a ghostbusters team was started with out the ghostbusters permission and it had ladies in skimpy outfit that where basically ditzes. and the guy was a total un redeeming jerk that later got shipped off to chicago. if I remember the story right.

However, agent oritz is an AWESOME character. that's what you get when you have things done by people who CARE about the franchise, rather than people who are so untalented that they can't figure out how to write a sequel.

Also, while we are on the subject, DC did something gimmicky that was probably seen as 'progressive' by suits recently as well. They made the FIRST Green Lantern (not Hal Jordan), gay. No one even remembers this character even existed unless you where a comic buff (I certainly didn't). but, instead of creating a cool, new character with an un written history and make him one of the first gay super heroes, they totally re wrote an existing characters background. that's not creative, that's just being lazy and pandering at best.

'I know what we'll do..we'll get a whole new audience in the gay community by making the green lantern gay!' 'But we can't do that, we'll alienate all the people who love hal, or kyle, or john as they are'..... monkeys thinking in brain cells.. 'I know! lets recreate alan scott! no one remembers him!' young intern 'wouldn't it be easy to create a NEW character and make him gay?' ceo 'you're fired...'

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Vivek said:

This is director Paul Feig's statement back in December 2014.

“A lot of people accused it of being a gimmick. I guess I can see the cynics’ view of it, but for me I just love working with funny women. People said, ‘Why don’t you do a mix?’ I’m just more interested in the idea of lady Ghostbusters. It’s the way my brain works. I want ours to be scarier than the original, to be quite honest. Katie Dipold and I are so focused on wanting to do scary comedy. We don’t want to hold back.”

Click to expand...

IT IS a gimmick. whether he wants to admit it or not. if it was a SEQUEL with the women discovering the car, firehouse and proton packs and trying to learn how to pick up the business, I'm willing to bet no one would care, so long as the casting choices and people behind it where good.

This is DAN AYKROYDS idea...and Harold Ramis. those two are the only ones who should have say in how things go. with approval by sony.

How this guy got involved and suddenly took control of everything away from them, along with sony is the big mystery. the fact that he's totally disrespecting EVERYTHING Ghostbusters stands for and trying to do things HIS way is the big problem here.