Ghostbusters movie by Paul Feig

Re: Ghostbusters 3

Here is what's wrong with women serving as the GB:

Statistically speaking, the inventors of goofy hi-powered hardware in their garages are not women. Nor are women the typical people doing dirty dangerous blue-collar jobs like city exterminators of ghosts.

I'm not saying several women cant do these things. I'm saying they statistically don't do these things. Some women as the GBs? Possibly. All women as GBs? No. I don't buy it. The idea doesn't threaten my masculinity, it conflicts with common sense.

If anything this is the only reason I like this remake. Nice to see women portrayed as engineers/bodgers in film, something sorely lacking in Hollywood. Should hopefully convince more young girls to get into STEM professions when they grow up.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

It looks like it is threatening your masculinity, dude. Show a graph of those statistics.

Well, while I don't agree that it's a problem from a plausibility standpoint this is actually a stat you can track (albeit only on the highest level). As of 2008, slightly dated I know, only 10.9% of US patents had a female listed as a contributing inventor, either solo or as part of a larger team comprising of mixed genders. That's abysmal however a HUGE leap from the paltry 1.7% in 1980.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

Here's the thing. It may succeed in spite of its tokenism. Maybe they'll pull it out and get a great film out of it. But my problem with tokenism is that it's often used as a crutch for weak or ho-hum storytelling. I honestly don't think that making the Ghostbusters all women is going to have any kind of dramatic effect on the story one way or the other. It's just a marketing hook, and a cheap one at that.

The story will be the story regardless of whether the Ghostbusters are all women, all gay, or all Aleutian Islander ex-waterskiing professionals who bleach their hair blonde. So the notion of "Oh, you know what would make this interesting? Making them CHICKS!!" to me falls flat. Why? Simple. Because it's the WRONG ANSWER. The right answer is "You know what would make this interesting? An interesting ****ing story." Making the GBs women doesn't automatically translate into "Well NOW it's interesting," and the assumption that it does suggests that the film/story underlying the sex change for the main characters is probably pretty lame.


And if you don't think that conveys it, imagine if we substituted any other "not white guys" group.

"The film was kind of boring UNTIL WE MADE THEM ALL...."

- "...BLACK!!"
- "...LATINO!!"
- "...HAWAIIAN!!"
- "...GAY!!"
- "...EGYPTIAN!!"
- "...ROBOTS!!"
- "...ANTHROPOMORPHIC FISH!!"
- "...MICHAEL KEATON!!" (It's a sequel to Ghostbusters AND Multiplicity!! It can't lose!!)


If the studio announced any of this, I'd have the same reaction: they're slapping identity on top of a lame story and hoping it'll still hold water. I doubt it will.

--EDIT--

I apologize for using Michael Keaton in that list. I realize he qualifies as a white guy.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

I've pretty much written it off but it did get me thinking on the all female thing and why it bugs.

Some fields are simply dominated by one sex or the other.
Thinking on this.... "ghost busting" in overalls with heavy equipment is sort of on the
pest control/emergency plumbing/firefighter sort of job. You see many women doing those jobs?
Not all that much, not saying no women do those jobs or can't..... relax, again RELAX!!!
I'm sure there is an all female example somewhere for that stuff BUT....
The sexes DO gravitate to certain occupations sometimes.
To have the whole team being women is forced
and too much in my view given how the ghostbusting job has been established as I mentioned before.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ghostbusters 3

If anything this is the only reason I like this remake. Nice to see women portrayed as engineers/bodgers in film, something sorely lacking in Hollywood. Should hopefully convince more young girls to get into STEM professions when they grow up.

As an engineer though, I can safely say that the vast majority of the engineering workforce at every company I've worked for has been male. That's not saying they were all GOOD engineers (case in point, some of the women I worked with were GREAT engineers), but there is a ratio.

Do I care about 4 women as Ghostbusters? Nope, not if they have the same chemistry as the original cast.

Do I think it's just being a pandering move by Hollywood to try to rake in money on another dismal reboot because they can't green light original ideas? Yep.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

Lots of female engineers where i work, (wireless industry).

Throw in a single Indian chick as the electronics expert, I might buy it.


EDIT
Private sector, I can attest they DO expect results.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

It looks like it is threatening your masculinity, dude. Show a graph of those statistics.

Naa, I'm not going spend effort defending a common sense argument just because it's not PC.


If you're serious then show me some evidence that I'm wrong.;)
 
Last edited:
Re: Ghostbusters 3

‘Ghostbusters’ Reboot: Will Bill Murray Return in a Smaller Role? | Variety

Full article:

" Paul Feig is working on an all-female reboot of “Ghostbusters” for Sony Pictures, but that doesn’t mean the new film won’t include Bill Murray. According to insiders, the studio would jump at the chance to sign Murray for either a cameo or supporting role. The real challenge will be convincing Murray, who for years has resisted making another “Ghostbusters.”

“The studio gets really crazy about it,” Murray told Variety during a sit-down interview for this week’s cover story. “What they really want to do is resurrect a franchise. The first one was a spectacular movie, one of the greatest movies. The second one was”–Murray makes an unimpressed sound. “It had some moves. It had a few good scenes in it.”

Murray is one of the few actors in Hollywood who can’t be bought. “People say, ‘Bill, you could get so rich!'” Murray says. “I’m ok.” He looks down at his red pants and plastic watch. “I don’t look it, but I’m doing ok.”

Over the years, Murray has looked over several treatments for a third film. “I read one that Danny [Aykroyd] wrote that was crazy bizarre and too crazy to comprehend,” Murray says. And then there was the script where his character died and returned as a ghost. “It was kind of funny, but not well executed,” Murray says. Sony was interested, and director Ivan Reitman (who made the first two films) tried to get Murray onboard. “It was clear he just didn’t want to engage,” Reitman says. “His head was in a whole different place as an actor. He wanted to do smaller roles where he didn’t have to take on the weight of the lead.”

Aykroyd recalls a similar conversation with Murray. “He said to me, ‘I’ve done the character,'” Aykroyd says. “I totally understand. The studio knew in their hearts that without Murray there may be nothing there. Plus, ‘Ghostbusters’ needs a shot of youth. It’s got to be handed to the new generation.”

Still, that doesn’t mean Murray couldn’t be there to pass the baton. During his interview with Variety, Murray left the door open–by a hair–indicating that he’d consider another “Ghostbusters” if the idea felt fresh. Feig and Katie Dippold (“The Heat”) are now working on the new script. “Those guys, Danny and Harold [Ramis], were at the top of their game,” Murray says. “They were burning nitro at that moment. Unless you have a really clear vision, you’re always trying to recreate that.”

Murray says he’s happy right now with the trajectory of his “Ghostbusters”-free career. He’s starring in the Weinstein Co.’s “St. Vincent,” and he’s wrapped a new Cameron Crowe film (out in May 2015) and the Barry Levinson comedy “Rock the Kasbah.” “I got like three in a row that could be really great,” Murray says. “I could be sitting in a different chair in a year. If all three of these are as good as I think they are, it could be easy. I won’t have to think about ‘Ghostbusters’ all the time.” "
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

The blonde one, Somerset O'Neil, she's the leader. The Japanese one is a kung-fu master. And the black one is a demolitions expert.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

I can't help but feel like Bill Murray has been trolling all the people that keep inundating him with questions about a movie he's long since moved on from. Then even his snarky remarks are finding their way into the direction of the new movie(s). For better or worse. There was the comment where he said he'd do it if he were dead, then rumors he was being written in as a ghost, etc.

That being said I'm super nostalgic about GB and it's easily in my top 5 movies. But I wouldn't mind seeing the formula used with modern approaches to horror and effects. It's just that the first half of GB stands out in my mind as some of the most well-written--and subtle--comedy in my lifetime. I don't get that vibe from, well, really ANY of the folks involved at this point. Even the actresses in the mix that I actually like, and even, sigh, Aykroyd.

Okay, I think I need to put on GB now so I can recite all the lines that are going through my head.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

IMO the original movie's style of humor is really starting to age it. It's not bad or even weak, just different from what anyone does today. Honestly I don't see it working now if it was done quite like that again.

However, I hope they don't turn the remake into scenery-chewing overacting & bodily function jokes. GB worked so well because you could take it a notch more seriously than you usually can with comedies.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

That's probably accurate as much as I'd lament it. I think that subtlety is not something that happens a lot in comedic cinema these days, at least at the scale that GB will be made. That's a pretty big generalization, but I think this is headed to more of an Anchorman place. On the other hand, early drafts were being written by the Office writers, a show that I think used quite a bit of the same dialog-driven humor. But I suppose it was the proton packs and marshmallow men that made the movie famous not the "listen-do-you-smell-something's" and any of Egon's lines. I just think those little things lent to it's longevity. But the movie will have the responsibility of a mass appeal. They can't make it for me or any other GB fans to call the best one yet, they just need to make a movie that won't be panned, that will sell toys, spawn a new cartoon, and establish a cinematic universe. And in the end, if I get to see proton packs and a reference to Tobin's spirit guide then I'll be happy enough.

I guess I'm hoping for more of a coen brothers humor than an Adam Kay brand. Ghostbusters was always a very smart movie, in my opinion, and I'd hate to see the material watered down. Of course, that's coming from someone who watches the first one religiously, but has seen the sequel only a few times.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

So this will be Charlies Angels with proton packs, right? I smell a Camron Diaz goofy dance scene seductively holding a proton wand.

No thanks.
 
Re: Ghostbusters 3

Naa, I doubt it will be that.

I certainly wouldn't put it past them to make that kind of mess. But that was the kind of female GB movie they might have made 10 years ago.

I don't think they are picturing sexy badass chicks being funny this time. They are probably picturing a cast of nerdy-funny chicks.
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top